INTRODUCTION. The adoption of unfriendly measures against third States as a way to force a policy change is not new between States and can be legally acceptable in specific cases dictated by the United Nations Security Council or when in accordance with international law. When lacking a linking element between both the punishing and the punished States, sanctions are unilateral, which, in the end, equates to a violation of the customary principles of sovereign equality and non-intervention, thus violating international law. The European Union seeks the pursuance of a distinct approach against several States, including the Russian Federation. In the end, the main goal of this study is to be able to provide an answer to the following question: are EU sanctions against Russia compatible with international law? MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study begins with the characterisation of the concept of “sanctions”, its typologies, its different ways of expression and the framework of sanctions under international law. It will be followed by an assessment on the political and legal position of the European Union on sanctions to then finalize with the specific case of the sanction’s regime adopted by Brussels against Russia. This work takes into account as main sources the instruments adopted by the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights, as well as legal doctrine, jurisprudence and normative elements. RESEARCH RESULTS. The result of the research conducted demonstrates the development of a trend within the European Union towards a concentration of powers in the Council of the European Union through vague and arbitrary normative instruments in order to adopt sanctions against third States. This trend gained more traction and legitimacy after the Treaty of Lisbon and is driven by the ambition of the European Union to directly influence the most significant international events and push for political changes in the targeted States, attempting to force the latters’ sovereign bodies to embrace the same values and principles as the Brussels based organization. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The notion of “sanctions” comprises two different mechanisms: decisions which, although may be unfriendly, are in accordance with international law; and unilateral coercive measures, which constitute breaches of international law. Despite the fact that the European Union’s sanctions regime is publicly presented under the name of “restrictive measures”, in the end, such measures are adopted outside the United Nations Security Council environment and lack a factual basis enough to justify such decisions, thus fitting in the scope of unilateral coercive measures, forbidden by international law.

INTRODUCTION. The UN Charter entrusts the General Assembly with the obligation to “initiate studies and make recommendations” to promote the progressive development of international law and its codification. This mandate is primarily implemented through cooperation of States within the UN International Law Commission (ILC). Beyond the ILC’s work, the significance of scholarly research in international law – whether individual or collective – remains debated, including the very validity of the term “unofficial codification of international law”. This article explores the practical impact of legal scholarship on the evolution of contemporary international law, particularly in light of the UN Charter’s reference to the “teachings of the most highly qualified publicists”.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article calls attention to the relevant provisions of the UN Charter (including such its integral component as the Statute of the International Court of Justice), and to the ILC documents, and to scholarly works on general international law, which cover its codification, progressive development and historical dimensions–by both domestic and foreign experts. Methodologically, it employs general scientific approaches (analysis, synthesis) and specialized legal methods, notably comparative legal analysis.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The UN Charter notion “the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists” means a special part of the broader concept – “the science of international law”. Merely addressing a particular topic of international law is not enough for qualifying its results as one of the “teachings” in the sense of article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of justice; a sort of key characteristics of such a “teaching” are suggested: the scholarly (academic) nature of a publication on the results of such international law research; taking into account the system of international law (that is, results of the research are not to be a fragmented presentation of a position regarding a specific issue of international law in isolation from its overall system); the professional achievements of the author of a publication in the area of international law, their recognition within the international scholarly community. The notion “the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists”, as it is used in the UN Charter and in its Commentaries, refers first of all to theoretical contributions on issues of international law that are produced by scholars, either individually or collectively; the term does not mean a document of a State.

DICUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The literature on international law demonstrates a variety of opinions relating to the role of legal research in the development of international law and its systematization, including different opinions as to the relation between the term “the science of international law” and the “teachings of the most highly qualified publicists”, as provided in Art. 38 of the ICJ Statute. What is suggested in foreign legal publications is, in particular, a positive description of the list of international lawyers whose works were already cited by the ICJ. The authors of this paper take a more critical approach, identifying that in this list the majority are scholars from the USA and Western Europe. In contrast, no doctrinal contributions of scholars from Russia or China, or from Africa or Latin America were cited by the ICJ. Such underrepresentation of legal research done in countries and regions noted above does not mean that international laws scholarship is less developed in these regions that in the USA and Western Europe. Rather the dominance of Anglo-Saxon legal scholarship in the ICJ practice is facilitated by other factors, including political ones, as indicated in this paper.

INTRODUCTION. Ensuring environmental safety is a key area of activity for a modern state, and the existence of the state directly depends on its implementation. At the current stage of society's development, developing a clear and structured national mechanism for implementing activities in this area has become as important as ensuring military and economic security. In recent decades, the Russian Federation has clearly adopted a policy of greening production, taking measures to ensure environmental safety, and implementing the fundamental constitutional right to a favorable environment. During his participation in the forum as part of the 9th Nevsky International Environmental Congress, Vladimir Putin emphasized: "In Russia, the issues of careful and efficient use of natural resources, ensuring environmental safety, and improving the quality of people's lives are among the key government priorities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study uses the works of both Russian and foreign specialists in the field of international environmental and international maritime law. The study uses general scientific methods of cognition, such as analysis, synthesis, induction, and deduction. It also uses special legal methods, such as formal legal methods, technical legal methods, the method of legal analogy, and the comparative legal method.
RESEARCH RESULTS. The article analyzes theoretical concepts of environmental security from various perspectives. The article analyzes the process of formation, establishment, and development of the concept of environmental safety in the Russian Federation, identifies innovations, and highlights the problems existing in our country regarding ensuring environmental safety and implementing environmental legislation in the field of protecting and preserving the environment and all its components.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The environmental situation around the world, and in Russia in particular, requires urgent measures to halt the rapid deterioration of all environmental components, which is largely caused by human activities, such as wasteful use of natural resources, inefficient land use, and the pursuit of economic gain. Humanity is facing a complex challenge of reconciling its growing needs with the limited capacity of the biosphere to meet them.

INTRODUCTION. With the polar regions becoming ice-free and scientific data on the hydrocarbon potential of the Arctic continental shelf increasing, the issue of a fair delimitation between the United States of America (U.S.) and Canada in the Beaufort Sea is becoming more acute. On September 24, 2024, both governments announced new delimitation negotiations (including the continental shelf). However, the U.S. is not party to the 1982 United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea. Furthermore, there are still no recommendations from the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf regarding Canada’s submission about the outer limits of its shelf. Therefore, a question arises about the viability and legitimacy of a final agreement on the delimitation of the Beaufort Sea from an international law perspective. In this article, the author shares his perspective on this issue.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study is based on scientific developments by Russian and foreign international lawyers, particularly over the past five years. The legal framework includes delimitation treaties between Arctic coastal states and decisions of International Court of Justice and international arbitral tribunals on delimitation issues. The methodology used includes general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, comparison, classification, systematization, and forecasting) as well as specific scientific methods (including formal legal analysis, comparative legal methods, and legal hermeneutics).
RESEARCH RESULTS. The author concludes that the creation of the joint task force to undertake negotiations on the maritime boundary in the Beaufort Sea is occurring in the context of climate change, which has heightened the region's economic importance and made the need for legal certainty more pressing. At the same time, several previous obstacles to negotiations have now become irrelevant. The current geopolitical context additionally stimulates the parties' interest in a peaceful settlement of the dispute. The paper argues that nothing in principle prevents the two states from undertaking continental-shelf delimitation beyond 200 nautical miles. Looking ahead, a central question will be how any bilateral settlement incorporates the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf’s recommendations for Canada.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The current environment, in contrast to previous negotiations, appears favorable to a mutually acceptable outcome. Nevertheless, several legal uncertainties persist—chief among them the method for delimiting areas beyond 200 nautical miles. At the same time, the absence of a recommendation from the CLCS to Canada may delay reaching a final agreement or lead to the development of temporary solutions. In general, despite the favorable political context, the author believes it is premature to discuss the possibility of a quick conclusion to the negotiations.

INTRODUCTION. With the steady increase in the number of migrants and forcibly displaced persons, migration has the potential to both contribute to the development of States and create problems for all parties involved. The United States of America is a country created by migrants. For a long time, it occupies the first place in the list of countries in the world in terms of the number of people on its territory who do not have citizenship of the host State. This indicates a special interest in the experience of migration policy and legislative regulation of migration in the United States. The article presents an analysis of the development of migration policy and migration legislation in the United States in the 17-21st centuries. Special attention is paid to the use of such measures of restriction and control of migration, as the detention of migrants and refugees. The norms in force are correlated with obligations of the USA under international law.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The work is based on the study of the US legislation in the field of migration and forced displacement, on analysis of international legal acts concerning migration, forced displacement and human rights protection, on the use of scientific literature in Russian and English, as well as statistical and other sources on the topic of the study. General scientific and specific scientific methods of cognition are applied: system approach, analysis, synthesis, formal-legal, historical-legal, and comparativelegal methods.
RESEARCH RESULTS. The study reveals that the migration policy and legislation of the United States of America have gone through several stages in their development, during which the attitude towards immigrants changed from encouraging immigration to introducing severe restrictions. The international legal framework concerning migration and forced displacement that has been formed to date does not fully bind the United States due to the state's participation in a small number of applicable international treaties, and the obligations that apply to the United States are not fully implemented.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The tools for implementing the US migration policy were characterized by significant diversity and included both methods acceptable from the point of view of contemporary international law and those that did not fully correspond to it, including detention and subsequent deportation of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, as evidenced by monitoring the United States’ implementation of their international legal obligations by the Charter-based (through the Universal Periodic Review) and treaty-based (primarily through the consideration of periodic reports) human rights protection bodies. At the same time, the extremely tough measures announced and already taken by D. Trump in 2025 do not radically change the vector of development of the migration policy, law and practice of the United States, as the USA have long since moved away from liberality and softness in establishing the conditions for entry into its territory and stay on it of migrants and refugees.

INTRODUCTION. The article examines the evolution of the concept of the integrity of the person in international law. An analysis of universal and regional international legal acts, as well as cases considered by international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, confirms the dual nature of this concept, which consists of the right to physical integrity and the right to mental integrity of the person. The article pays particular attention to the challenges posed by the rapid development of neurotechnology, which require a rethinking of the concept of the integrity of the person, particularly its mental component. The doctrine considers approaches that propose either the creation of new, so-called neurorights, or their inclusion within the existing right to mental integrity of the person, protected by analogy with the experience of safeguarding the right to physical integrity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study is based on a comprehensive analysis of international legal acts and the case law of international judicial bodies. Its methodological basis comprises general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, systematic approach) and specific legal methods (formal-logical, structural-legal, comparative-legal). Particular emphasis is placed on the combined use of the comparative-legal method and the systematic approach in analysing the protection of the right to the integrity of the person among fundamental human rights at the universal and regional international levels. In addition, the author applies the ‘stairs study’ method when examining the practice of international judicial bodies in this field.
THE RESEARCH RESULTS. It has been established that the concept of the integrity of the person enshrined in international law is dual in nature, covering physical and mental integrity. It is shown that while the physical aspect has been developed in sufficient detail, the mental component has long remained in the shadows and has only recently become the subject of active discussions. It has been revealed that the development of neurotechnologies (neurostimulation, neurohacking, memory manipulation) poses threats to mental autonomy and cognitive freedom of a person, which actualizes the issue of the need for a new system of guarantees.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The article discusses various doctrinal approaches to protecting mental integrity: from broadening the interpretation of existing rights (the right to respect for private life, human dignity, freedom of thought) to creating new special rights (the right to mental privacy, the right to cognitive freedom, the right to mental self-determination). The author agrees with the prevailing view that neurorights should be considered not as entirely new rights, but as a logical development of the right to mental integrity of the person. It is concluded that mental integrity should be legally defined and specified, by analogy with physical integrity, while considering modern neurotechnological risks, in order to ensure the effective protection of fundamental human rights and dignity.

INTRODUCTION. This article examines the monitoring of human rights compliance in the European Union’s Generalised Scheme of Preferences (hereinafter GSP) programmes. It aims to analyse how the European Union (hereinafter EU) uses trade preferences as leverage to promote human rights in developing countries, with a particular focus on the effectiveness of monitoring mechanisms and withdrawal procedures. The research objectives include tracing the evolution of the EU GSP programmes, examining the current monitoring system, evaluating the recent case of Cambodia’s partial withdrawal, and identifying both strengths and limitations of the system along with potential improvements.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research employs multiple methodological approaches, including comprehensive document analysis of EU regulations, particularly Regulation (EU) No 978/2012 governing the current GSP programmes, and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1083/2013 detailing the withdrawal procedure. This article utilises case study analysis focusing on the recent partial withdrawal of trade preferences from Cambodia due to systematic human rights violations, particularly the dissolution of the Cambodia National Rescue Party and the arrest of its leader, Kem Sokha. Additionally, reports from the United Nations (hereinafter UN) and International Labour Organisation (hereinafter ILO) monitoring bodies, as well as EU institutions, were examined to evaluate the effectiveness of monitoring mechanisms. This methodological framework allows for a systematic assessment of both formal procedures and the practical implementation of the EU’s human rights conditionality in external trade relations.
RESEARCH RESULTS. The study reveals that the EU monitoring system operates through a multi-tiered approach, ranging from enhanced engagement to initiating formal withdrawal procedures. The Cambodia case demonstrates both the merits and constrains of this system. Despite years of engagement with the European Commission, Cambodia’s human rights situation did not improve sufficiently, resulting in a partial withdrawal of the Everything But Arms (hereinafter EBA) programme preferences, which affected approximately 20 % of Cambodia’s exports to the EU. The study identifies key merits of the monitoring system: the step-by-step approach allows beneficiary countries time to address violations; evidence-based assessments from multiple sources promote objectivity; and the potential for leverage creates economic incentives for compliance. However, significant weaknesses include insufficient transparency, centralised decision-making, disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations, and limited leverage when beneficiaries have alternative markets.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The analysis suggests that while the EU’s GSP monitoring system provides a framework for promoting human rights through trade, substantial refinements are needed to enhance its greater effectiveness. Recommendations include establishing more defined expectations for beneficiaries based on their specific circumstances, increasing transparency through public hearings and disclosure of “issue lists”, conducting social impact assessments before implementing withdrawals, and coordinating with other developed countries to create a unified approach. The EU system stands out for its progressive GSP+ programme that employs a carrot and stick approach, but it must balance leverage with avoiding disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations in beneficiary countries.

INTRODUCTION. In 2023, the Eurasian Patent Organization prepared and published a Program for the development of the Eurasian Patent Organization until 2028, according to which one of the activities of this regional international organization is the development of the Eurasian dispute resolution system. In addition, the practice of the Intellectual Property Rights Court, a specialized court in the system of arbitration courts of the Russian Federation, indicates a gradually growing number of disputes over Eurasian patents, which inevitably leads to precedent decisions due to the specifics of the legal regulation of relations regarding Eurasian patents. In this regard, it seems relevant to study and evaluate the prospects for the development of dispute resolution mechanisms for Eurasian patents.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study of the issue under consideration is based on the work of Russian and foreign scientists in the field of patent and international law, the legal regulation of patent dispute resolution, regulatory legal acts of the Eurasian patent legislation, and judicial practice. The methodological basis is based on general scientific and special legal methods (including comparative legal and historical legal methods).
THE RESEARCH RESULTS. The study identifies the problems and aspects related to the application of the norms of the Eurasian Patent Convention (EAPC) and Patent Regulations in the process of dispute resolution on Eurasian patents, such as: the multilevel nature of the legal regulation of Eurasian patents, the lack of mechanisms among the EAPC member states to ensure uniform application of the norms of Eurasian patent legislation, the relationship between the norms of Eurasian patent legislation and national patent law.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. With the view to ensure uniformity in the application of Eurasian patent law, it is proposed to develop mechanisms for inter-judicial cooperation, as well as to create a unified database of court decisions on patent disputes. Currently, the creation of the Eurasian Patent Court seems premature due to the insufficient number of disputes, but this issue remains relevant in the long term, especially given the possible expansion of the list of protected industrial property objects. In any case, this will require the formation of a judicial pool with technical expertise or the involvement of specialists to consult on complex issues. As an alternative solution, it is proposed to establish a quasi-judicial advisory body that will ensure a uniform interpretation of the norms of Eurasian patent legislation and facilitate the proper resolution of disputes.