INTRODUCTION. Problems related to forced migration continue to be one of the priority and sensitive issues in many countries. The article analyzes various initiatives of individual States related to the transfer of forced migrants to third countries and the consideration of their applications for international protection outside their territory on the basis of international agreements or political arrangements. This practice represents one of the modern trends in the international legal regulation of forced migration. In scientific doctrine and in separate acts published by the UNHCR, it is referred to as the “externalization” of international protection. The relevance of the study is due to the growing number of forced migrants and tightening of migration policies in the host countries.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article examines examples of both bilateral agreements on the “externalization” of international protection and proposals by the Commission of the European Union (hereinafter – EU) to consolidate this practice at the level of EU law. Individual EU member States, primarily Italy, are developing a trend of extraterritorial application of national legislation in the field of legal regulation of certain aspects of forced migration on the territory of another State, which must also comply with EU law. The authors pay special attention to the legal analysis of the “migration agreements” of individual states, in particular the Protocol on the Extraterritorial Management of Migration between the Government of the Italian Republic and the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Albania 2023 and its consequences, as well as the Proposal of the EU Commission on the adoption of a new Return Regulation. The research used historical, formal legal, comparative legal methods, the method of system analysis, etc.
THE RESEARCH RESULTS. It has been revealed that “externalization” takes various forms, including extraterritorial consideration of applications, measures to intercept migrants, transfer of responsibilities to third countries, etc. However, such practices are often accompanied by human rights violations, including restrictions on access to asylum and the risk of forced expulsion. Judicial authorities have repeatedly recognized such measures as illegal.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The study demonstrates that the policy of “externalization” contradicts the principles of global solidarity and fair distribution of responsibilities. Despite attempts to formalize guarantees for migrants, the risks of violations remain high, especially when transferred to countries with underdeveloped asylum systems. The author emphasizes the need to comply with international standards and strengthen the role of judicial control to prevent abuse. In conclusion, it is noted that the further development of this practice requires an integrated approach that takes into account both the security of States and the protection of the rights of forced migrants.

INTRODUCTION. This article discusses how such principle of international law as principle of cooperation develops within the BRICS. The choice of this topic is based on the fact that today we are facing crisis of classical international organizations, such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization on the one hand and on the other hand active and effective development of international cooperation within the BRICS. However, BRICS does not possess international legal capacity. This means that, it does not possess international rights and obligations; it cannot act as subject of international law. From the first sight these facts should be regarded as obvious weakness of such form of international cooperation as BRICS. However, this form of cooperation as will be shown in this article have demonstrated its effectiveness in development of international cooperation in various spheres. Alongside with that, BRICS attracted very little attention in the international legal scholarship and was predominantly assessed by political science and political economy. This article is aimed at filling this gap, assessing BRICS from international legal perspective.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. General scientific methods of cognition (analysis, synthesis, induction, and deduction), special legal methods (formal-legal, technical-legal, method of legal analogy), comparative legal and case study method were used in the presented research.
RESEARCH METHODS. This article elaborates on new landscape of international legal principle of international cooperation through soft law-making and informality addressing the question whether such form of international cooperation as BRICS may provide an alternate or a complementary forum to cooperate and agree to mutually acceptable decisions on matters relating to international rulemaking. The author proposes conceptual discussion on whether duty to cooperate, to be indeed effective, should be based on the principles enshrined in the BRICS instruments such as multipolarity, inclusiveness and mutual benefit and whether these instruments reflect progressive development of principle of international cooperation. The author continues with a discussion on whether “soft” nature of BRICS and its approach to the principle of cooperation could provide a way to overcome today’s crisis that classic international organizations are facing.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author of this paper argues that considering BRICS phenomena, international law should evolve focusing on progressive development of principle of international cooperation. This will increase efficiency of international law under today’s crisis of classical international organizations. BRICS could be regarded as a soft institution (by analogy with so called “soft law”) which at least supplement classical international organizations or at most may substitute them. National interests, multipolarity, inclusiveness and mutual benefit as main pillars reflecting development of cooperation withing the BRICS should be taken as basis for progressive development of international legal principle of international cooperation.

INTRODUCTION. There are different forecasts of the period when natural resources activities (even on small scale) in outer space start. The innovative trends in national legal regulation on the property rights to space resources among states-partners to the Artemis Accords de facto outpace the actual commencement of such activities, even on relatively small industrial scales. Existing governmental and non-governmental lunar projects (in some cases in their interaction) at this stage are focused on obtaining and analyzing sufficient scientific data for relevant assessments. However, the legal and economic processes related to the regime on the use of natural resources of celestial bodies (in the relatively near term – directly in space (the so-called “in situ resource utilization”) to support the space missions; in the more distant term – for commercial purposes) require urgent attention. This issue is among the most illustrative and significant in understanding the possible and advisable ways and directions of the further development not only of international space law but also of national space legislation, including with the aim of creating favorable conditions for attracting investment into the private space sector of the national economy, in particular to the future use of space resources. Therefore, this study is devoted to a systematic analysis of the current state, as well as the necessary changes and development paths of the Russia’s related legislative approach.
MATERIALS and METHODS. The theoretical background of this research consists of works of Russian and foreign legal scholars, including experts in international space law, national legislation of foreign countries and Russia. The analytical framework includes the UN treaties on outer space; documents of the UN COPUOS Legal Subcommittee; national space legislation of foreign states, comprising the acts adopted in 2024–2025 by the United States, Brazil, Italy; relevant laws and court practice of Russia. The main methods are those of formal logic such as analysis, synthesis, analogy, alongside systemic, and comparative-legal.
RESEARCH RESULTS. 1. Innovative laws and bylaws of the United States, Luxembourg, the UAE, Japan, as well as Brazil and Italy, outpace the development of special international legal regime on natural resources of celestial bodies. 2. The first licenses for space natural resource activities were issued in Japan and Luxembourg for the purpose of fulfilling contractual obligations to NASA related to the lunar regolith samples’ collection. 3. The US Presidential Executive Order "Enabling Competition in the Commercial Space Industry” of August 13, 2025, provides for reforming regulatory barriers and excluding excessive and duplicative licensing requirements applicable to various types of space activities, including the "novel" ones as under its Sec. 5. 4. The general legislative framework for space activities, including mechanisms to support private space endeavors, in the states-parties to the Artemis Accords, as well as to intergovernmental agreements on ILRS, is unevenly developed. 5. The national legislation of Russia: regulates the main issues of space activities but does not contain sufficient legislative incentives for the development of private space industry; space resource activities are not addressed in it; there are only indirect signs that such activity is potentially possible.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. 1. In a number of foreign countries, space resource acts were enacted in the absence of regulation of general space activity issues, and de facto, along with other factors of political and economic nature, challenged its development. 2. The adoption of the US Presidential Executive Order "Enabling Competition in the Commercial Space Industry” of August 13, 2025 will impact the large-scale development of “novel” space activities initially within the framework of currently priority scientific missions, and then in the long term, with confirmation of economic feasibility, also for commercial purposes. 3. A broad recognition exists both among the states-parties to the Artemis Accords and intergovernmental agreements on ILRS, including Russia, of the advisability of creating favorable legislative conditions for the development of private space activities. For these purposes, the relevant laws and by-laws, including those on space natural resources, are being adopted quite rapidly by states that previously were not active actors on the global space activity arena. 4. These legislative and economic factors in their interaction gradually lead to an increase in investments in the space sector of various countries, and at this stage, the adoption of space resource acts is only one of the reasons. 5. To improve Russia’s space legal framework, the following changes are recommended: a) regarding general measures to support the development of private space activities: elimination of excessive regulatory barriers within the licensing system for space activities; establishment of the upper limit on the obligatory space liability insurance coverage; creation of conditions for developing the national insurance market for risks related to space activity, including property insurance; creation of effective economic conditions for interaction and cooperation between government and private entities in implementing space projects in national interests. b) regarding space natural resource activities: comprehensive legislative reform aligned with Russia’s clarified (in the interests of the development of the Russian economy) relevant international legal position; in addition to general supportive measures for the development of private space activities, it is advisable to review the possibility to include space resources within the objects of regulation of Russian legislation, including the issue of property rights to the extracted resources.

INTRODUCTION. This article examines Hong Kong’s sanctions, countermeasures and unilateral restrictions policy and practices existing within and determined by the China’s approach in this sphere. Although Hong Kong, as a special (autonomous) administrative region of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), should strictly abide by the basic tenets of PRC’s policy – recognition of legitimacy of only United Nations Security Council’s (UNSC) sanctions, legality of countermeasures introduced in response to delinquent acts of international actors and formal and rhetorical rejection of unilateral restrictive measures, – the autonomy has certain distinct characteristics in this area which reflects a special status of Hong Kong in the constitutional and political system of the PRC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The author used publicly available documents and materials of the United Nations, PRC’s government bodies, Hong Kong’s Legislative Council and executive bodies, academic sources of Russian, Hong Kong, Mainland Chinese and Western scholars and experts, as well as periodical publications, to examine how the sanctions, countermeasures and unilateral restrictions regime of Hong Kong works and what distinguishes Hong Kong’s policy in this area from China’s. For the purposes of this study the author employed general methods of scholarly research and special methods of legal research.
RESEARCH RESULTS. Led by the foreign policy imperatives of China, Hong Kong must adhere to UNSC sanctions recognized and implemented by the PRC. However, Hong Kong is not legally bound to comply with China’s countermeasure and unilateral restrictive measures (official or informal). Likewise unilateral restrictive measures imposed by Western states have no legal force in Hong Kong. Yet, paradoxical it may sound, Hong Kong business community (linked with the West by numerous long-standing business ties), foremost banking and financial sector, do in fact by and large adhere to such unilateral restrictive measures because of fear of being targeted by Western secondary restrictive measures. Thus, Hong Kong constitutes a subsystem of rules, regulations and practices on implementation of sanctions, countermeasures and unilateral restrictive measures, on the one side, premised on the principles and rules of the PRC, and, on the other side, detached and distinguished from regulations and practices of China in this area. Considering Hong Kong business circles’ keenness to comply with Western unilateral restrictive measures, including anti-Russian restrictive measures, and go even further by halting all transactions and relations with any person having a nexus to jurisdictions heavily targeted by the Western unilateral restrictive measures, this autonomous region of China is and will continue to be quite a difficult place for Russian entrepreneurs to do business.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. This study demonstrated distinct features of the Hong Kong’s regime of sanctions, countermeasures and unilateral restrictions which one may rightly classify as a special subsystem of China’s regime. The author came to the following conclusions. First, Hong Kong shall implement UNSC sanctions in accordance with the instructions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the PRC but on the basis of autonomy’s own laws and regulations. Second, Hong Kong, as a non-sovereign entity, does not impose its own countermeasures or unilateral restrictive measures on sovereign states (institution of such measures falls squarely within the responsibility of the PRC central government). Third, anti-unilateral restrictive measures laws and regulations, enacted by the PRC, are not applied in Hong Kong unless they are added to Annex III to the Basic Law (mini-constitution) of Hong Kong. Fourth, countermeasures and unilateral restrictive measures instituted by China against third countries in compliance with her antiunilateral restrictive measures laws and regulations, as well as unofficial bans, have no legal force in the autonomy, except prohibitions on entry of persons, targeted by China, to Hong Kong. Fifth, a large number of Hong Kong companies (foremost local, Mainland Chinese and foreign banks and financial institutions) with long-standing trade and economic connections with Western counterparts routinely comply with Western, mostly the United States, unilateral restrictive measures (including unilateral restrictive measures against Hong Kong) and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (a de facto central bank of the autonomy) even makes it mandatory for the financial institutions, operating in the territory, to comply with Western unilateral restrictive measures.

INTRODUCTION. In the context of global transformations in recent years – the growth of cross-border threats, digitalization, and the aggravation of environmental and geopolitical challenges – the importance of international administrative law as a new form of public regulation is significantly increasing. The subject of the study is the formation and development of international administrative law as a system of norms and procedures that ensure the administrative interaction of states in a transnational space. The relevance of the topic is due to the need to adapt national legal systems to the processes of globalization and supranational governance. This issue is of particular importance for the formation of a stable legal order based on the principles of cooperation and a balance of sovereignty. In the context of the increasing complexity of international relations and the growing role of international organizations, the study of international administrative law makes it possible to identify trends in the transformation of public administration on a global scale.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research is based on the analysis of international agreements and initiatives of 2022-2025 (the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, the Agreement on Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, the practice of sanctions regimes), as well as on the works of domestic scientists – A.B. Zelentsov, A.A. Demin, N.I. Begimova, O.N. Sherstoboev. Comparative-legal, formal-legal and institutional-functional methods are applied.
RESEARCH RESULTS. It is revealed that international administrative law is gradually acquiring institutional outlines, turning from a theoretical category into a real management mechanism. Sustainable practices of interstate administration in the fields of ecology, cybersecurity, migration and digital regulation have been formed, based on the principles of transparency, accountability and coordination of actions of national administrations.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The concept of “international administrative law” encompasses a set of procedures and norms governing cross-border interaction between public administrations. However, its status remains controversial: along with the recognition of the need for coordinated management mechanisms, there are concerns about the loss of elements of sovereignty. The practice of recent years shows that the adoption of international agreements in the field of ecology, digitalization and cybersecurity contributes to the formation of real tools for global administration. Nevertheless, these processes are developing outside of a single legal framework, which creates risks of inconsistency and legal uncertainty. Consequently, the further development of international administrative law requires systematization and codification based on the principles of international law and respect for State sovereignty.

INTRODUCTION. The modern system of international relations is characterized by the presence of unrecognized states – political-territorial entities that possess features of statehood but have not received official recognition from the international community. The existence and functioning of such political-territorial entities within the official borders of sovereign states entails the emergence of a conflict between the principle of territorial integrity and the right of peoples to self-determination. The resolution of this contradiction largely stems from two opposing theoretical approaches to state recognition: declarative and constitutive – which does not allow for finding a universal solution to the problem of the international legal status of unrecognized states. Under conditions of such legal uncertainty, unrecognized states are forced to function within a dualistic international legal status, characterized by a divergence between formal and actual capabilities. The purpose of this article is to identify the features of the international legal status of unrecognized states and to determine the nature of limitations on their legal personality in the modern system of international relations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study utilized a wide range of international legal instruments, including the UN Charter and the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. Materials from judicial practice of national courts and international arbitrations on the application of law of unrecognized states were also examined. Additionally, official documents and agreements regulating actual interaction between unrecognized states and sovereign states were analyzed. General scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, systemic method) and special scientific methods were employed, including comparative legal method, formal legal method, method of legal practice analysis, and structural-functional analysis.
RESEARCH RESULTS. The article establishes distinctions between unrecognized states and related categories, including partially recognized states and states not recognized by individual states. Analysis of formal and substantive approaches to defining unrecognized states, as well as integrative concepts developed in contemporary international law doctrine, was conducted. Key limitations of the international legal status of unrecognized states were examined and mechanisms of their actual participation in international relations were identified.
DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS. Based on the conducted analysis, a conclusion has been formulated about the dualistic nature of the international legal status of unrecognized states, which manifests itself in the division into formal-legal and factual components. It has been substantiated that formally and legally, unrecognized states correspond to three of the four criteria of statehood according to the Montevideo Convention, but lack the capacity for official establishment of relations with sovereign states (the fourth criterion). It has been established that the factual international legal status of unrecognized states is formed as a result of the implementation of sovereignty by other states as participants in international interstate relations, which enter into unofficial political and economic interactions with unrecognized states. Similarly, international intergovernmental organizations and integration associations, which are not sovereign entities, can also enter into actual interactions with unrecognized states. A conclusion has been drawn that the international legal status of unrecognized states is not universal in nature and is formed individually depending on the positions of individual subjects of international interstate relations that enter into interaction with such states.

INTRODUCTION. This article presents an analysis of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) Court's advisory opinion of April 7, 2025, clarifying the provisions of the EAEU Treaty regarding the common services market. In considering the case, the Union Court was required to address questions related to the application of freedom of services provisions to air transportation services within the Union. The main issue addressed before the Court was to what extent the cross-border air transportation within the EAEU is governed by international air law and by EAEU law. Given three dissenting opinions, consensus on this issue was not reached. Nevertheless, the Grand Collegium formulated a legal position according to which freedom of services provisions apply to air transportation services to the extent that they do not conflict with common transport policy. Accordingly, member states cannot impose additional restrictions, and the Eurasian Economic Commission has jurisdiction in this area.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The methodological basis of the study was formed by traditional general scientific and specialized methods of understanding legal phenomena: the comparative legal method; the method of scientific analysis; the formal legal method; and the method of synthesizing socio-legal phenomena.
RESEARCH RESULTS. As a result of the study, the author concluded that international air transportation within the EAEU is regulated by a complex set of legal norms, including international air law, the national laws of member states, and the EAEU's law regarding the free movement of services and coordinated transport policy.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Current international air law, including the 1944 Chicago Convention, does not impose any restrictions on the extension of provisions on free trade in services to commercial air transportation. In fact, two parallel systems can be identified regarding the regulation of international air transportation: the first is based on the Chicago Convention; the other is an economic system based on bilateral agreements or a regional system. EAEU law provides for the creation of a common air transportation market, but it has not yet been formed. At the same time, member states must not introduce new restrictions on trade in transport services that did not exist at the time of the conclusion of the EAEU treaty. EAEU legal norms regarding trade of services and coordinated (harmonized) transport policy and international air law do not compete, but, together with national law, form a complementary legal system in the field of air transportation.

INTRODUCTION. Historically, fishing was considered as a key economic sector in the largest island in the world, Greenland. Due to the climate change and global warming of the World Ocean, particularly in the northwestern Arctic, the interest in the industrial exploitation of marine living resources in Greenland's exclusive economic zone has increased significantly. Today, Greenlandic waters are frequented not only by European and Russian fishing vessels, but also by vessels from China. Therefore, at this stage and in the future the governance of Greenland's fishing industry and international cooperation between the island and other countries are of particular research interest.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study is based on normative and scientific analytical materials that reveal Greenland's bilateral treaty practices with states engaged in fishing in the maritime areas adjacent to the island. The article examines the history of the development of international legal norms, as well as Greenland's domestic legislation on fisheries. In conducting the study, the authors used historical, comparative legal, logical, comparative analysis, analogy, description, generalization, and several other general scientific and specialized legal methods.
RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH. The authors highlight the main reasons for Greenland's attractiveness to the world's leading fishing powers recognized the island's strategic value for the development of their economies. In the analysis it has been revealed that Greenland adheres to a policy of containing Russia, in line with the EU and the US policy, including in the Arctic region. This has become evident in current bilateral fisheries relations. However, unlike Greenland, the Faroe Islands, as a part of Denmark, pursue a more pragmatic fisheries policy vis-à-vis Russia, extending the fisheries agreement and allocating quotas for Russian vessels in their exclusive economic zone on a reciprocal basis. This rational approach, primarily based on economic interests and historical relationships, allows the Faroe Islands to maintain stable relations with Russia despite the European trend toward Russia’s containment.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The current geopolitical shifts have impacted the fishing industry. It is expected that the deliberately drawing Greenland into a standoff with Russia will negatively impact international cooperation in the marine living resources exploitation and fisheries in the northwestern Arctic and adjacent seas, as well as the overall military and political situation in the Arctic region.

INTRODUCTION. The study presents a comprehensive analytical review of legal challenges in Mars colonization, examining the evolution and systemic gaps in international space law. It analyzes existing legal mechanisms, from the 1967 Outer Space Treaty to the latest initiatives, including the Artemis Accords and the updated 2024 COSPAR policy. The relevance of this research is determined by the rapid development of space technologies and the growing interest in Martian missions from both state space agencies and private companies. The purpose of the research is to identify potential problems in the legal regulation of relations related to the possible colonization of Mars. To achieve this goal, the authors solve the following main tasks: to investigate the sources of international space law that are potentially applicable to a Martian colony, to identify the problems of legal regulation of a Martian colony, and to propose mechanisms for their solution. The authors emphasize that establishing a sustainable, meaning self-sufficient and capable of long-term development, colony on Mars is impossible without forming a clear and comprehensive legal framework that regulates all aspects of human presence on the planet – from issues of jurisdiction over settlements, their inhabitants, and space objects and resource utilization to planetary protection and resolution of potential conflicts.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research methodology is based on a comprehensive application of formal legal and comparative legal methods. The empirical basis of the study consists of international legal instruments in the field of space law, national legislation in the space sphere, documents of international organizations, and materials of arbitration practice on space disputes.
RESEARCH RESULTS. The study establishes that the key principle of non-appropriation of celestial bodies (Outer Space Treaty of 1967) creates a legal conflict with the practical need for territorial control for future settlements. Regulatory gaps were identified concerning the use of in-situ resources (ISRU) while complying with planetary protection requirements and the legal status of children born on Mars. The analysis shows that unilateral acts (U.S. and Luxembourg laws on resource extraction) and new multilateral initiatives (the Artemis Accords) conflict with universal norms of space law. Legal precedents, such as the Kosmos-954 satellite incident, demonstrate the limited applicability of existing liability mechanisms to complex Martian missions.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The study shows that the legal regulation of Martian colonization presents an unprecedented challenge for the international community. Successful implementation of the Martian program requires the creation of a comprehensive legal framework that takes into account both the technical and scientific aspects of Mars exploration, as well as the socio-economic factors of international cooperation. The key elements of this framework should be: a clear definition of jurisdiction over Martian settlements, resource allocation mechanisms, a dispute resolution system, and Mars environmental protection protocols.

INTRODUCTION. Dredging is an activity aimed at increasing the depth of a specific water area by extracting bottom sediments. This activity is carried out using a special type of technical fleet vessels – dredgers. The high technical complexity of dredging operations, their environmental impact, and the unique nature of this activity, which requires the use of specialized vessels, necessitate a comprehensive regulatory framework. The European Union (EU, Union) is home to leading companies providing dredging services, making the EU’s regulatory approach to this sector of particular interest.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. This article examines the legal aspects of dredging regulation in the EU. The author relies on the works of both Russian and foreign scholars dedicated to the legal and operational specifics of dredging activities. Given the topic of this study, the works of Russian scholars primarily focus on general aspects of dredging operations, whereas foreign researchers address specific regulatory issues within the EU. The study is based on an analysis of EU legal acts, including primary EU law, such as the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as well as secondary EU law—various directives and regulations governing dredging operations. The author also examines case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) related to dredging activities and the operation of dredging vessels. Additionally, the study considers global international treaties on navigation and other sources of international law. The research methodology includes formal legal analysis, legal hermeneutics, and comparative methods.
RESULTS. The EU does not classify dredging as a transport service but rather regulates it as an engineering, hydraulic, and construction activity. This approach is both justified and widely applied: navigability is a secondary aspect of dredging, whereas the primary objective is sediment extraction. The EU’s regulatory model for dredging can be characterized as flexible, as it balances the fundamental principle of the freedom to provide services with the necessity of protecting critical infrastructure, which allows for restrictions on access to the EU dredging market on security grounds. However, the study identifies gaps in the regulation of extracted sediment, which, depending on the circumstances, may be classified either as waste or as a secondary resource. Additionally, there is a lack of detailed rules governing the access of foreign companies to the EU dredging market.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. The flexibility of the EU’s regulatory approach to dredging allows for adaptation to specific project conditions, which is one of its key advantages. However, the absence of a uniform approach to the legal status of extracted sediment creates uncertainty in regulatory enforcement. Moreover, although EU law provides for restrictions on market access for third-country companies, these restrictions are currently implemented through measures against foreign subsidies rather than direct market access limitations, which contradicts the original intent of such restrictions. Overall, the EU's regulatory experience in this sector can be considered positive, though requiring further refinement and improvement.