INTRODUCTION. When it comes to regulating cross-border relations, the rules of law of a given state, foreign national laws and international legal norms are/may all be applicable. In their entirety, these norms form a sort of buffer zone between existing legal systems, i.e. create a legal phenomenon that can be called a legal frontier. It is within the framework of this frontier that numerous legal phenomena occur, with the very concept of their existence in recent years being either challenged or blatantly denied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The provisions of international treaties, the national legislation of Russia and other states, as well as numerous works of Russian and foreign researchers were used as materials for this study. The study relies on the general scientific and special methods as its methodological foundation.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The study found that foreign laws do not coincide, applying them to regulate crossborder relations leads to cases where relations of the same category are managed differently even within a single state. All known sources of law serve as the generators of norms that govern cross-border relations, which is not the case for either domestic or international interstate relations. Additionally, new sources of international legal norms have emerged and their objective is to regulate cross-border public relations not specified in Art. 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The article states that significant changes in the theory of general international law (as well as in the general theory of law) are caused by the emergence of self-executing international legal norms designed to regulate cross-border social relations specifically.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author comes to the conclusion that the emergence of self-executing international legal norms required a change in the very definition of international law, admitting the impossibility of the existence of any universal theory of the relationship between international and national law, as well as specifying the nature of the object and subject of an international treaty. The use of self-executing international legal norms as regulators of crossborder public relations does not transform these relations into international interstate relations and does not turn their subjects into subjects of international law. These relations remain as cross-border relations, and their subjects have an exclusively cross-border legal standing, regardless of which legal system norm was responsible for regulating them.

INTRODUCTION. Customary international law is the oldest source of International law and has been its main source for centuries. However, even in our time, the importance of custom in International law is preserved – besides and on par with international treaties; this is the other type of its legal norms. The main difference between the two kinds of norm is the unwritten form of custom, but customary and treaty norms have equal legal force.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The documentary basis of the study is international treaties and international customs, resolutions of the UN General Assembly, Statute of the International Court of Justice and its jurisprudence, reports of the International Law Association. The theoretical basis of the article is the works of scholars of international law. The methodological basis of the study is general and particular scientific methods of cognition.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The research in the article leads to a conclusion that comprises a definition of international custom, and this is the formulation of it as applicable law in cases before the International Court of Justice: “international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law” (Art. 38 (1) (b) of Statute of the Court). According to this definition, the customary legal rule contains two elements: objective, also material the practice of States, and subjective – the conviction of States that this practice is obligatory, i.e. law. It has been established in International law that the subjective element is termed by the Latin expression “opinio juris sive necessitates” (opinion of law or necessity), and most often the subjective element is briefly called only “opinio juris”. The research reveals as its result that by its nature opinio juris represents a conscious, intentional attitude towards State practice. The will of the State has external manifestations – the consent, acceptance, recognition and conviction of the State.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The main conclusions of the research relate to the question of the formation of opinio juris. This formation is a process that is integrated: it simultaneously forms the practice of States and the opinio juris towards it. Opinio juris does not have an autonomous stage or process of formation, nor is it formed only after the practice of the customary law rule has been completely formed. The conclusion from the integrated process is that each act of the relevant practice, which is the same as the previous one, but also as the next one, helps to form the belief that this is the only, and therefore obligatory, manner to perform the practice. Conversely, States' belief that a given practice is obligatory motivates them to perform only that practice.

INTRODUCTION. A group of foreign international scholars has recently published a collective monograph – “Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories” [Contingency in International Law…2021]. The starting point of this work is the question why international law is as we know it today, and whether it could be different. The problem of possible alternative ways for development of international law calls challenges the necessity of the current state of international law and urges to research the interrelation among the power of international law itself, historical context and wills of subjects involved in international law-creating.

MATERIAL AND METHODS. The research material for the present article is the collective monograph “Contingency in International Law: on the possibility of different legal histories” edited by I. Venzke and K.J. Heller. The study of the presented ideas is based on general scientific methods and private legal methods, as the historical and legal approach.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The development of a national international legal scholarship of the theory of international law sometimes needs an intellectual impulse, a bold statement of questions that challenge the dominant theoretical principles. In this regard, the question on the possibility of different ways of developing international law due to a variety of factors, could be a trigger for rethinking positivist attitudes in the Russian theory of international law. The intention in revising the classical theses does not imply rejection of established legal positions, but, on the contrary, it necessitates fruitful reflections on traditional tenets. This assumption is illustrated with the concept of the international legal policy of the state, which originates from the classical theory of coordination of wills, and at the same time makes a number of assumptions or explanations which could answer questions about contingencies in formation of international legal norms. Relying on the materials of the book edited by I. Venzke and K.J. Heller the article provides outlook on questions about chance and regularities in determining the content of international law, about role of context in the creation and development of international law, about the sovereign wills and role of contingencies and extra-legal factors in the concept of international legal policy.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In contrast to the theory of coordination of wills, which is based on strict positivist grounds, the concept of the international legal policy of State assumes influence of extra-legal factors for arrangement of international legal argumentation of States. For example, the problem of context is of great importance in determining the possibility of legitimizing certain international legal positions of State. The arguments of States as such with references to norms of international law remain fruitless outside certain context (including present content of international law, current state of international relations, topics on the international agenda). This is because legitimated legal norms fix the current results of coordination of wills among States, which depend on interaction of legal and nonlegal factors. But it is also important to understand limits of assumptions about impact of certain factors on the content of international law. So, on the one hand, the role of context should not be overestimated, since international law does not succumb to conjuncture, but develops consistently. At the same time, by studying international legal policies of States, one should avoid false determinism. It poses the risk to trace a wrong strategic line of State's legal arguments with over-shadowing ‘irrelevant’ facts. Thus, questions that open perspectives on seemingly solved problems make it possible to develop established doctrinal ideas in a new direction. However, it is necessary to take into account methodological limits of new assumptions for consistent development of contemporary national discipline of international law.

INRTODUCTION. Of all the Arctic seas going into the coast of Siberia, the Kara Sea is conspicuous because of delineation by islands from the rest of the Arctic Ocean. These islands are undisputedly under the sovereignty of Russia from the time immemorial. Such peculiarities have predetermined the character of the power of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union and the contemporary Russia relevant to the Cara Sea. In 2022 seven western States-Members of the Arctic Council introduced their disagreements with Russia relating to the non-Arctic issue, thus breaking the traditional “immunity” of the Arctic from political and legal conflicts in other regions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The author researched the legal documents of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation along with the research publications relating to the status of the Kara Sea. The methodological basis of the research methods as well as specific methods of jurisprudence are used.

RESEARCH RESULTS. In the period of the Russian Empire the international law advisor to the Head of the Russian State asserted only the possibility to qualify the Kara Sea as internal waters of Russia. However, in the period of the Soviet Union the soviet legal scholars unanimously qualified the Kara Sea as part of the state territory of the USSR. However, at the official level no relevant legal act was adopted. In 1985 the Decree of the Government of the USSR was adopted according to which for the first time in the history the previous doctrinal position was dismissed and most of the Kara Sea was qualified as the waters beyond the state’s maritime territory.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In the author’s opinion, the 1985 the Decree of the Government of the USSR have consequences in the context of general international law, that is it is impossible for the modern Russia to return back to the soviet legal position as formulated by the soviet legal teachings. However, the 2022 breaking by the seven western Arctic states the traditional Arctic “immunity” from the non-Arctic conflicts (as noted above) has made legitimate the responsive measures of the Russian Federation in the Arctic. In this context Russia is entitled to respond by strengthening its regulatory measures in the Kara Sea. The relevant research views regarding such measures are suggested in this article.

INTRODUCTION. Fighting is increasingly taking place in populated areas, including large cities, which leads to indiscriminate attacks on civilians and civilian objects. This problem is recognized by the UN, by an increasing number of States and requires training of combatants to choose and apply appropriate means and methods of war in populated areas to prevent or minimize accidental harm to the civilian population and civilian objects in such conditions. However, for example, the actions of the US-led coalition in 20162017 to liberate Iraqi Mosul from terrorists, the armed formations of Ukraine in the Donbas since 2014, which caused unjustifiably large civilian casualties and destruction of urban infrastructure, indicate that the Western powers and their satellites ignored these requirements.The purpose of the article is to identify and scientifically analyze problematic issues in the application of international humanitarian law for the protection of civilians and civilian objects in armed conflicts in urbanized areas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. To reveal the theoretical aspects of the problem under consideration, a system-structural approach, generalization, deduction, methods of scientific abstraction, logical and system analysis are applied. Special research methods were also used: historical-legal, comparative-legal and formal-legal.

RESEAECH RESULTS. Within the framework of this publication, the authors analyzed the problems of international legal protection of civilians and civilian objects in the context of hostilities in an urbanized area and developed proposals for their solution.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. According to the results of the study, it was found that the principles and norms of international law developed by mankind as a whole make it possible to ensure the protection of the civilian population and civilian objects during the conduct of hostilities, including in cities, under the key condition the realization of responsibility for crimes against peace, humanity and war crimes.

INTRODUCTION. In recent decades, there has been an escalation of armed clashes in the territories of African states, the states of the Middle East and Central Asia with the participation of military formations, international terrorist groups that everywhere use the practice of attacking and looting cultural property as a military strategy. In this regard, of scientific and practical interest is a comprehensive study of the legal and organizational foundations of international legal regulation of the protection of cultural property during armed conflicts, evaluation of their effectiveness and identification of promising tasks for the development of additional measures and strategies for the preservation of cultural heritage, taking into account new challenges and threats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. This paper examines the provisions of key international treaties, decisions of the main bodies and specialized agencies of the UN, which together form the existing international legal regime for the protection of cultural property in armed conflict. The author also analyzes the jurisprudence of international criminal justice bodies on bringing individuals to justice for deliberate attacks on cultural sites as part of hostilities. Special attention is paid to the study of scientific works of both domestic and foreign scientists, within which international legal concepts are formed, designed to resolve existing problems in the current international legal regulation of the issue under study, as well as to form promising concepts in the framework of the development of the doctrine of international law. The methodological basis is made up of general scientific and special research methods.

RESEARCH RESULTS. According to the results of the study, it was found that during the XX century states have consistently developed norms for the protection of cultural property from threats associated with armed conflicts, while the XXI century was marked by best practice in the application of the rules on liability for attacks on cultural property in situations of armed conflict in the activities of international justice bodies. In addition, it was determined that for the first time in the history of UN peacekeeping, the UN Security Council tested the mandate of the Multidisciplinary Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali, in which the peacekeeping contingent, among other things, performed the tasks of protecting, safeguarding and restoring cultural heritage sites together with UNESCO. It seems significant to identify and generalize the prospects for the development of new international legal measures for the preservation of cultural heritage for future generations, taking into account the changing nature of armed conflicts, the intensification of the activities of international terrorist groups and the growing practice of destroying the centuries-old cultural heritage of peoples in the framework of the so-called “cultural cleansing". The topical aspect of the study was the establishment of new approaches of states to the protection of cultural heritage as a means of ensuring international peace and security.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The publication presents the author's objective assessments of the established international legal framework, judicial practice of international criminal justice bodies, as well as doctrinal approaches of both domestic and foreign scientists on the issue of international legal regulation of the protection of cultural property during armed conflicts. Separately, the forms of international legal cooperation of states at the UN site within the framework of the UNESCO profile organization for the development of modern regulatory and organizational foundations for the interaction of the competent authorities of states to prevent and suppress the destruction of cultural heritage, as well as the looting and illegal export of cultural property in the event of an armed conflict, especially terrorist groups.

INTRODUCTION. The interaction of international judicial institutions in the context of cross-judicial references is one of the most important mechanisms for the development of law. The appearance of a large number of competing international judicial institutions and the rapid development of public relations have led to the formation of a stable practice of such interaction. On the European continent, cross-citation interaction can be most clearly seen in the relationship between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. In the context of the phenomena of cross-judicial references, the author points out their high importance for the development of the institution of protection of human rights and freedoms in Europe.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study uses the works of both Russian and foreign specialists in the field of European law, as well as analyses of the European Union and Council of Europe legal acts. General scientific methods of knowledge analysis, synthesis, induction and deduction were used during the study. Special legal methods formal-legal, technical-legal, the method of legal analogy, as well as the comparative legal method were also used in the work.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The analysis of the current practice of cross-citation between the two judicial bodies clearly demonstrates the high relevance of cross-citation in terms of the development and integration of the human rights law in the European region. The author concludes that cross-citation between the two courts ultimately significantly improves the level and effectiveness of the protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms in Europe, contributing to an active convergence of judicial positions and a harmonisation of approaches taken by the courts in resolving similar cases.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. As part of the research, the author analyzes the process and mechanisms of interaction between the European Union Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Examined the case law of the two judicial bodies in order to determine the direction of their interaction. Explored the characteristic and specific features of cross-citation carried out by the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Based on the results of the study, the author comes to the conclusion that cross-citation carried out by the EU Court of Justice and the ECtHR contributes to the harmonization of European norms in the field of human rights protection and preserves the unity of the European legal system.