INTRODUCTION. The paper demonstrates that the problem of implementing judgments of the European Court of Human Rights does exist if such a judgment is not in line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation. This problem is caused in legal dimension by the two different factors. On the one hand the Constitution of the Russian Federation “shall be the supreme law and shall be in force throughout the territory of the Russian Federation. No laws or other legislative acts … shall contravene the Constitution of the Russian Federation” (Article 15 Part 1). On the other hand, a State may not invoke its internal (national) law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty (Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969).

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Research materials include judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and Orders of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and also the teachings of the most qualified scholars in International Law which are relevant to the title of this paper. General and specific scientific methods are used by the author. In the context of applicable general international law the paper considers both judgments o the European Court of Human Rights and orders of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation paying specific attention to the reasons of different legal positions adopted by these Courts.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The widening of the competence of the Сonstitutional Court of Russia in December 2014 arouses apprehension. The Court pointed out that two judgments of the European Court on Human Rights were unenforceable: (1) on the judgment on the application of Anchugov and Gladkov and (2) on the judgment concerning the application of UKOS. In the first case the European Court on Human Rights admitted that Russia was responsible for moral damage and the recognition of it was enough for compensation. In the second case the European Court on Human Rights admitted that Russia violated Protocol No.1 to the Convention on Human Rights. In connection with it Russia must compensate the pecuniary damage. It is confirmed by the Committee of Ministers (the Council of Europe).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation indeed has (as its professional function) an obligation to legally protect the national interests of Russia if they are questioned by a judgment of a foreign court which does not correspond to International Law. But in cases considered in this paper the Constitutional Court of Russia while addressing the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (which are in contradiction with the International Law) made itself a legal mistake from the point of International Law. According to Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith”. Even in the case when the national law provides for a different approach (article 27 of the same Convention). The Constitution of any State is a part of its national law. So the 1969 Convention’s rules of Articles 26 and 27 are applicable also to Constitutions. While stating that the Constitution has a higher legal value then International Treaty of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court thus undermines the national interests of Russia in maintaining legal order and the Rule of Law in international relations.

INTRODUCTION. This paper is devoted to interpretation of so-called WTO “Security Exception Articles”, namely Article XXI of the GATT, XIV bis of the GATS and 73 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to their possible applicability to trade restrictive measures adopted against Russia, and Russian countermeasures, based on the assumption that these trade restrictive measures violate WTO disciplines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials for the article were norms of general international law and norms of WTO law, containing so-called security exception provisions and their respective interpretation by international tribunals, international organizations and scholars. The methodological basis of the research consists of general scientific and special methods.

RESEARCH RESULTS. Taking into account that there is a lack of WTO jurisprudence and no common view of WTO members regarding the issue at hand, the analysis is based on the scope of Security Exception Articles and on the Panel’s jurisdiction to resolve disputes arising from them. In particular, the paper addresses whether security exceptions are of a self-declaratory nature; and, as it was stated by the GATT Council in 1985 in relation to the US trade embargo against Nicaragua, “the Panel cannot examine or judge the validity or motivation for the invocation of article XXI (b) (iii) by the United States” or whether it is possible to apply an objective test to Security Exception Articles.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. With respect to the objective test, the interpretation of the following notions should be analyzed: “essential security interests”, “emergency in international relations” and “necessary to protect”. The analysis should be based on rules of general international law and the Appellate Body’s approach according to which previously established interpretations of certain provisions of one WTO Agreement can be used to inform the content of the same ‘words’ in another WTO Agreement. With respect to the subjective approach we may face a tendency to interpret “self-judging clause”, in the light of “a good faith” principle and therefore the issue at hand can be subject to the Dispute Settlement Body's analysis.

INTRODUCTION. The main subject of the article is the protection of entrepreneurs and the improvement of national economic security in the context of international legal standards. The article provides a definition of international legal standards as standards, agreed by states and stipulated in international treaties. Historically, they began to evolve in the context of international human rights law. In this regard, the fundamental international legal acts that may be applicable in the context of the rights of entrepreneurs are: the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966, the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. Then some aspects are scrutinized: the standard for the exchange of information on financial accounts of the OECD, business ombudsman, state practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials for the study were the modern works of scientists, the laws of the Russian Federation and other states, as well as international legal acts on international experience protecting the rights of entrepreneurs, ensuring business security, as well as problems associated with the consolidation of this experience in national, political, economic systems. The methodological basis of the research was the general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The results of the research are that, firstly, at the present stage, significant international experience has been accumulated to protect the rights of entrepreneurs and industrialists, which is not only successfully used, but also perfected, improved with respect to the national specifics of doing business in each individual country, and, that through the study of international experience, it is possible to reach the highest level of business security at the national level, as well as to solve problems related to fixing this experience in national, political, economic systems.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The main conclusions: firstly, that each country can achieve a high level of business security at the national level through the study of international experience; secondly, at the present stage, a significant international experience has been accumulated to protect the rights of entrepreneurs, which is not only successfully used, but perfected with reference to the national specifics of doing business in each individual country, and, thirdly, it seems possible to solve problems related to the reduction of this experience in national, political, economic systems.

INTRODUCTION. The authors of the article analyze the contemporaneous issues of international responsibility for transboundary harm in connection with oil field exploitation such as the definition of transboundary harm and criteria of such harm. The practice of implementation of responsibility in case of an accident on the transboundary oil fields is also considered.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. In the process of development of the article, the authors referred to academic papers of Russian and foreign scholars and researchers in the sphere of international environmental law and domestic environmental law; materials of the UN International Law Commission, state practice, media materials, and documents prepared by the transboundary fields' developers. The authors used such general scientific and specific methods as a method of analysis and synthesis, the method of induction, the comparative method.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The article contains conclusions on particular issues of implementation of responsibility for transboundary environmental harm and includes analysis of the influence of such issues to the cases of oil spills and other accidents on transboundary fields. The authors refer to oil spills accidents in the Gulf of Mexico, the Caspian Sea and the North Sea as bright examples of such implementation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. As a result of the conducted research, the authors highlighted criteria of transboundary harm. The authors make a conclusion on the prevalence of application of the national civil law mechanism of responsibility implementation in case of oil spills and other accidents on transboundary fields.

INTRODUCTION. Considering close attention of the states to the work of the World Trade Organization, the interest is undoubtedly attracted by new agreements, adopted by it and based on current trends of trade development and aspiration of the states to conduct foreign economic activity more productively and without barriers. In particular, the article concerns Agreement on Trade Facilitation, adopted in 2014. The article tackles peculiarities of providing privileges for developing and least developed countries with respect to application of Agreements’ provisions, as well as tariff preferences concerning goods originating in these countries on the example of the EEU.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. During the research the author has used international conventions, adopted within both the World Trade Organization, and World Customs Organization, modern doctrinal research of Russian and foreign authors. The methodological basis of the research constitute method of the systematical and logical analysis, dialectic method, legal-historical, comparative law and technical juridical methods.

RESEARCH RESULTS. In the course of the conducted research the author notes that the Agreement’s provisions relating to the special and differential treatment for developing and least developed countries are very progressive. An innovation is the possibility of application of obligations under the Agreement by least developed countries only in part, which corresponds to their individual level of development, financial and trade needs. Unlike Section I of the Agreement, concerning which the author drew very skeptical conclusions in the previous article, Section II is rather innovative and provides actual mechanisms of support for the least developed countries.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author analyzes provisions of the Trade Facilitation Agreement (further – the Agreement) that was adopted in 2013 and came into force in 2017, which is directly included in the Appendix 1A of the WTO Agreement, after the Agreement on Safeguards. The article tackles provisions, relating to the special and differential treatment for developing and least developed countries. Besides, the author analyzes theoretical aspects of categorizing states as such. The author gives examples of providing tariff preferences for goods originating in developing and least developed countries, of conditions and application standard of the EEU uniform system of tariff preferences, the list of such countries. Comparing and analyzing international agreements on these matters, the author comes to the following conclusions. Provisions of Section II of the Agreement differ from earlier established ones concerning developing and least developed countries, provide more preferential terms of application of the Agreement, taking into account potentialities of the country. At the same time, very important is the principle of individual approach to each such country, which independently defines a possibility of application of the Agreement provisions. Besides, an opportunity to simultaneously demand help for capacity-building is, of course, quite progressive for such agreements. The author notes that the EEU provisions concerning goods, originating in developing and the developed countries – users of the Union uniform system of tariff preferences, meet international standards and promote economic progress of developing and least developed countries.

INTRODUCTION. Military interventions in Syria by the US and its allies confirm a tendency in the policy of Western countries to ignore international law and to act in accordance with the “rule of force”, without the sanction of the UN Security Council. Russia, as a state that respects its sovereignty and international law, does not accept this approach. Russia stands for diplomatic dialogue at all venues in order to stop destabilization in international relations, including the confrontation in Syria, and to find proper legal solutions. The article recommends specific options for such solutions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study relies on such legal sources as the UN Charter, generally recognized principles of international law, UN Security Council resolutions, the Joint Statement of the Presidents of Russia and the United States on Syria of November 11, 2017, the joint press conference of the Presidents of Russia and the United States in Helsinki on July 17, 2018 as well as scientific studies of Russian and foreign researches. The research involved general scientific and comparative legal and historical methods of study.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The author concludes that the United States and its allies using military force in Syria act in violation of the UN Charter. Russia, on the contrary, uses its military contingent in Syria in full accordance with the provisions of the UN Charter on the collective self-defense, at the request of the legitimate government of Syria.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author makes a concrete proposal for the search of a peaceful settlement in Syria on the basis of the Joint Statement, which was approved by the Presidents of Russia and the United States in November 11, 2017 following their meeting on the margins of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit meeting in Danang, Vietnam. The author advocates that Russian and American experts jointly reconsider main elements of this document and provide an up-dated version with due account of new realities, and submit it to the UN Security Council for the adoption of a consensus resolution that would lay down the international legal framework for a peaceful settlement in Syria.

INTRODUCTION. At present, the European Union in the security area is represented by a wide list of institutions, bodies and structures. They formed in stages, essentially evolving “from Maastricht to Lisbon”. As the result of the legal evolution the European Union the constitutional documents contain the rules of law that allow to apply the enhanced cooperation in different areas and to approach the necessary flexibility to various integration processes. In addition, as the result of this work, was launched Permanent Structured Security Cooperation format.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article is based on treaties, declarations of States and doctrinal research on the law of treaties. The author relies on various methods to reach their conclusions, among which treaty interpretation is most frequently used.

RESEARCH RESULTS. In November 2017, the Ministers signed a common notification on the Permanent Structured Cooperation and handed it over to the High Representative to the Council. In December of the same year, at the European Union leaders summit the start of the Permanent Structured Cooperation (European Defense Union) format was proclaimed. In March 2018, the Council approved a resolution defining the list of projects that are to be launched in PESCO. This circumstance had a sign effect and now new security mechanism of the EU obviously should be taken into account in Russian and the EU relations strengthening European security area.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In the current geopolitical turbulence, the Russian Federation's relations with Western and Western European partners are going through “hard times”, and Russia is perceived more as a “threat” than as a “good neighbor” and partner in the security area. In such case, the legal evolution analysis of the defense and security cooperation mechanism described in this article will be useful for understanding the prospects of the potential new form of cooperation between Russia and the EU in peace strengthening and security in the European region.

INTRODUCTION. The work of the International Court of Justice is the benchmark not only for other international courts and tribunals but also for the States which with rapt attention follow its decisions, though formally these verdicts are binding only for the Parties to the dispute. Evidently each ICJ case goes far beyond the bounds of a bilateral dispute and Court's conclusions are more general in nature thus being applicable to other situations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. In the Article the practice of the International Court of Justice for the previous five years starting from 2013 till 2017 is researched: both the cases, which the International Court had reviewed and in respect of which pronounced its verdict in the last five years, and the cases which had been in the docket of the Court by the end of 2017 are analysed. Apart from this the author also looks at the previous practice of the Court with an aim of pinpointing the tendencies in ICJ work. Further more, the Article is furnished with the statistical data which helps to better appreciate the “price” of the efforts of the Court to promote the development of international law and resolve challenges which it is confronted with.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The Article demonstrates that the Court's practice highlights many of the current world's most outstanding problems and shows how States perceive possible solutions thereof. The author comes to a conclusion that the work of the International Court of Justice demonstrates high demand in its services and also proves it to be an influential authority in matters of high complexity and sensitivity. The Court manages to be an objective and efficient body using international law to advance stability on international arena.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. As a conclusion the article provides some of the recent and most prominent trends in the Court's practice. Among them are the higher demand for the provisional measures to be established by the Court in cases of crises, disputes with regard to the jurisdiction of the Court becoming “standard”, an increasing amount of attempts for the revision of the Court's verdicts (or their interpretation), growing external pressure, endeavours to politicize its work, and a corresponding, as it seems, increase in discord between the ICJ Judges.

INTRODUCTION. The present article is devoted to considering specificity of the Council’s of Europe action on coordinating cooperation between member states in the area of research and developments as well as international technology transfer with the aim of transition towards sustainable development. In this connection, author addresses some issues concerning how this international organization promotes “green” track of modern scientific and technological progress not only in Europe, but also around the world.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. In the course of preparation of this study, writings of foreign and Russian researches in the field of international law and law of international organizations was being used. At that, author have used materials and documents of Council of Europe, analyzed conventions of this organization, as well as sources of its “soft” law, namely resolutions and recommendations of the PACE, Committee of ministers and Congress of local and regional authorities.

RESEARCH RESULTS. On the basis of conducted research author comes to the conclusion that balance – advocated by Council of Europe – between human rights and scientific progress is a significant aspect of sustainable development that should act as background of process of international scientific and technological cooperation and transfer of “green” technologies.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author comes to conclusion that the law of Council of Europe embraces multitude of international legal obligations conducive to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals including SDG No. 17 considering knowledge and technologies as tools for transition to sustainable development. At the same time, success in realization of given obligations depends on readiness of member states to follow related provisions of “hard” and “soft” law of this organization that is a part of international sustainable development law.

INTRODUCTION. The proliferation of legislative, judicial and general administrative jurisdiction to Crimea in the spring of 2014 highlighted a number of new issues in the regulation of civil law relations in the international and local sphere that faced the courts in the Russian Federation, as well as the need to make adjustments to approaches related to the recognition of foreign state law acts and enforcement of foreign judgments. In the field of private international law, in addition to the mentioned, an understanding of the phenomenon of collision of various multi-national norms arose not in space, which is the central subject of this science, but in time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The works of Russian and foreign authors are the material of the article. In this work historical, inductive, and comparative research methods were used.

RESEARCH RESULTS. This article is on the subject of conflict of law’s regulation pertaining to the claims of losses, the right from the Crimea territory before and after its reunification with the Russian Federation on the 18th of March 2014. The author presents recommendations relating to legislative solutions and amendments to civil and criminal law regulation in line with consideration of judicial competence of national courts in the light of Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters, signed on the 22nd January 1993 in Minsk by participants of CIS, as well Agreement on Settlement of Commercial Disputes of 20th of March 1992.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author concludes that in view of coming the new jurisdiction in annexed Crimea the foreign elements that arose before this event disappear, and therefore it is necessary to be guided by its legal order in the absence of its regulation in question. The Anglo-Saxon concept of vested rights is not applicable in this exceptional case.

Evgeny G. Moiseev (1939 - 2018).