Izvestiya of Saratov University.

Economics. Management. Law

ISSN 1994-2540 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1956 (Online)

For citation:

Torosyan R. A. The Social Security Men in the Area of Family Relationships in Decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. Journal Izvestiya of Saratov University. Economics. Management. Law, 2017, vol. 17, iss. 1, pp. 96-103. DOI: 10.18500/1994-2540-2017-17-1-96-103

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).
Full text PDF(Ru):
PDF icon 1-2017_ekonomika.96-103.pdf
(downloads: 0)
Language: 
Russian
Heading: 
Law
Article type: 
Article
UDC: 
342.41
DOI: 
10.18500/1994-2540-2017-17-1-96-103

The Social Security Men in the Area of Family Relationships in Decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights

Autors: 
Torosyan Rima Andranikovna, Saratov State University
Abstract: 

Introduction. Article is devoted to research of practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights concerning implementation by men of their social rights on an equal basis with women. Discussion. The author as a result of research of practice of the Constitutional court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights, places emphasis on the line items providing in the decisions concerning admissibility and inadmissibility of the differentiation resulting in distinctions in the social rights of men and women. Conclusion. In an analysis result of law-enforcement practice, the author comes to a conclusion that interests of children shall is put in a basis of the solution of questions of provision of social privileges and guarantees to men and women. Need of identification and the subsequent elimination of positive discrimination if the last is not caused by the objective purposes. Protection in implementation of the social rights from the constitutional justice is not always provided to men in Russia even if it concerns interests of children.

Key words: 
Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation
European Court of Human Rights
men and women
equal rights
children
child care leave
maternity capital
Reference: 
  1. 1. Konstitutsiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii (priniata vsenarodnym golosovaniem 12.12.1993) (s uchetom popravok ot 30.12.2008 № 6-FKZ, ot 30.12.2008 № 7-FKZ, ot 05.02.2014 № 2-FKZ, ot 21.07.2014 № 11-FKZ) [The Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by the popular vote of 12.12.1993) (amended on 30.12.2008 no. 6-FKZ, on 30.12.2008 no. 7-FKZ, on 05.02.2014 no. 2-FKZ, on 21.07.2014 no. 11-FKZ )]. Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF [Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation], 2014, no. 31, art. 4398 (in Russian).
  2. Borisenko Yu. V. Psikhologiya ottsovstva [Paternity psychology]. Moscow, Obninsk, IG-SOTsIN Publ. 2007. 220 p. (in Russian).
  3. Zaikov D. E. Otpusk po ukhodu za rebenkom dlia voennosluzhaschikh muzhskogo pola: byt’ ili ne byt’? [Child care leave for the male military personnel: to be or not to be?]. Pravo v Vooruzhennykh silakh [Right in Armed forces, 2011, no. 5 (167), pp. 7–12 (in Russian).
  4. Ob otkaze v prinyatii k rassmotreniyu zhalob grazhdanina Markina Konstantina Aleksandrovicha na narushenie ego konstitutsionnykh prav polozheniyami statei 13 i 15 Federal’nogo zakona «O gosudarstvennykh posobiyakh grazhdanam, imeyuschim detei», statei 10 i 11 Federal’nogo zakona «O statuse voennosluzhaschikh», stat’i 32 Polozheniya o poryadke prokhozhdeniya voennoi sluzhby i punktov 35 i 44 Polozheniya o naznachenii i vyplate gosudarstvennykh posobii grazhdanam, imeyuschim detei: opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 15.01.2009 № 187-O-O (About refusal in acceptance to consideration of claims of the citizen Markin Konstantin Aleksandrovich to violation of its constitutional rights provisions of articles 13 and 15 of the Federal law «About Public Welfare Payments to the Citizens Having Children», articles 10 and 11 of the Federal law «About the Status of the Military Personnel», article 32 of the Regulations on an order of passing of military service and points 35 and 44 of the Regulations on appointment and payment of public welfare payments to the citizens having children. Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 15.01.2009 no. 187-O-O). ATP «Consultant» [electronic resource] (in Russian).
  5. Kovalev A. A., Ispolinov A. S. Delo Konstantina Markina. Evropeiskii sud po pravam cheloveka i Konstitutsionnyi sud Rossiiskoi Federatsii: dialog ili konfrontatsiya [Konstantin Markin’s case. European Court of Human Rights and Constitutional court of the Russian Federation: dialogue or confrontation]. Rossiiskoe pravosudie [Russian justice], 2011, no. 5 (61), pp. 4–14 (in Russian).
  6. Delo «Konstantin Markin (Konstantin Markin) protiv Rossiiskoi Federatsii» (zhaloba № 30078/06). Po delu obzhaluetsya otkaz natsional’nykh vlastei v predostavlenii trekhletnego otpuska po ukhodu za rebenkom. Po delu narusheny trebovaniya stat’i 14 vo vzaimosvyazi so stat’ei 8 Konventsii o zaschite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod: postanovlenie Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka ot 22 marta 2012 g. (Case «Konstantin Markin (Konstantin Markin) against the Russian Federation» (claim no. 30078/06). On case refusal of the national authorities in provision of three-year child care leave is appealed. On case requirements of article 14 in interrelation with article 8 of the Convention on human rights protection and fundamental freedoms are violated. The resolution of the European Court of Human Rights of March 22, 2012). Byulleten’ Evropeiskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka [The Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights], 2012, no. 6. ATP «Consultant» [electronic resource] (in Russian).
  7. Mikirtumov I. B. Argumentaciya i legitimnost’: Delo Markina [Argumentation and legitimacy: Markin’s case]. RACIO.RU, 2015, no. 15, pp. 97–133 (in Russian).
  8. Zor’kin V. D. Predel ustupchivosti (Compliance sidealtars). Rossiuskaia gazeta (Russian newspaper. Site). Available at: https://rg.ru/2010/10/29/zorkin.html (accessed 17 July 2016) (in Russian).
  9. Zakonoproekt № 540300-6 Federal’nogo zakona «O vnesenii izmenenii v otdel’nye zakonodatel’nye akty Rossiiskoi Federatsii v chasti predostavleniya voennosluzhaschim muzhskogo pola, prokhodyaschim voennuyu sluzhbu po kontraktu, otpuska po ukhodu za rebenkom do dostizheniya im vozrasta trekh let» (Bill no. 540300-6 of the Federal law «About Modifi cation of Separate Legal Acts of the Russian Federation regarding Provision by the Male Serviceman Passing Military Service under the Contract, Child Care Leaves before Achievement of Age by It Three Years»). Gosudarstvennaia duma RF (State Duma of the Russian Federation. Site). Available at: http://asozd2.duma.gov.ru/main.nsf/(Spravka)?OpenAgent&RN=540300-6&02 (accessed 17 July 2016) (in Russian).
  10. O dopolnitel’nykh merakh gosudarstvennoi podderzhki semei, imeyuschikh detei (s izm. i dop., vstup. v silu s 01.01.2016): federal’nyi zakon ot 29.12.2006 № 256-FZ (red. ot 30.12.2015) [About additional measures of the state support of the families having children (with changes and additions, come into force with 01.01.2016). Federal law of 29.12.2006 no. 256-FZ (an edition of 30.12.2015)]. Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF [Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation], 2007, no. 1 (pt. 1), art. 19; 2016, no. 1 (pt. 1), art. 53 (in Russian).
  11. Ob otkaze v prinyatii k rassmotreniyu zhaloby grazhdanina Luk’yanitsy Aleksandra Vladimirovicha na narushenie ego konstitutsionnykh prav i konstitutsionnykh prav ego nesovershennoletnikh detei Luk’yanitsy Vladimira Aleksandrovicha i Luk’yanitsy Nikolaya Aleksandrovicha polozheniyami stat’i 3 Federal’nogo zakona «O dopolnitel’nykh merakh gosudarstvennoi podderzhki semei, imeyuschikh detei: opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 23.06.2015 № 1518-O (About refusal in acceptance to consideration of the claim of the citizen Lukyanitsa Alexander Vladimirovich to violation of its constitutional rights and constitutional rights of his minor children Lukyanitsa Vladimir Aleksandrovich and Lukyanitsa Nikolay Aleksandrovich provisions of article 3 of the Federal law «About additional measures of the state support of the families having children». Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 23.06.2015 no. 1518-O). ATP «Consultant» [electronic resource] (in Russian).
  12. Pushkarskaya A. Kapital ostalsia tol’ko materinskim [The equity remained only maternal]. Kommersant [The Kommersant], 2015, 20 July (in Russian).
  13. Konstitutsionnyi sud otkazalsya priznat’ pravo ottsaodinochki na materinskii kapital. A odin iz sudei napomnil o nedopustimosti diskriminatsii (The Constitutional court has refused to recognize the right of the single father to a maternity capital. And one of judges has reminded of inadmissibility of discrimination). Available at: https://zakon.ru/discussion/2015/7/20/ks_otkazalsya_priznat_pravo_otcaodinochki_na_materinskij_kapital__a_odin_iz_sudej_napomnil_o_nedopus (accessed 1 July 2016) (in Russian).
  14. Konventsiya o zaschite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod (zakliuchena v g. Rime 04.11.1950) (s izm. ot 13.05.2004) (vmeste s «Protokolom [№ 1]» (podpisan v g. Parizhe 20.03.1952), «Protokolom № 4 ob obespechenii nekotorykh prav i svobod pomimo tekh, kotorye uzhe vkliucheny v Konventsiyu i pervyi Protokol k nei» (podpisan v g. Strasburge 16.09.1963), «Protokolom № 7» (podpisan v g. Strasburge 22.11.1984) (The convention on human rights protection and fundamental freedoms (it is concluded in Rome 04.11.1950) (with amendment from 13.05.2004) (together with «Protocol [no. 1]» (it is signed in Paris 20.03.1952), «Protocol no. 4 on providing some rights and freedoms in addition to those which are already included in the Convention and the fi rst Protocol to it» (it is signed in Strasbourg 16.09.1963), «Protocol no. 7» (it is signed in Strasbourg 22.11.1984)). Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF [Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation], 2001, no. 2, art. 163 (in Russian).
  15. Po delu «Pini i Bertani, Manera i Atripal’di (Pini and Bertani, Manera and Atripaldi) protiv Rumynii» (zhaloby № 78028/01, 78030/01). Po delu stavitsya vopros o primenimosti polozhenii Stat’i 8 Konventsii k situatsii, v kotoroi okazalis’ priemnye roditeli, ne imeyuschie nikakikh tesnykh svyazei s det’mi, kotorykh oni udocherili, buduchi za rubezhom; pri etom udocherennye deti prodolzhali ostavat’sya v detskom dome posle ikh udochereniya. Polozheniya Stat’i 8 Konventsii o zaschite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod k dannomu delu primenimy: informatsiya o postanovlenii ESPCH ot 22.06.2004 (In the matter of «Pini and Bertani, the Manner and Atripaldi («Pini and Bertani, Manera and Atripaldi) against Romania» (claims no. 78028/01, 78030/01). On case the question of applicability of provisions of Article 8 of the Convention to a situation in which there were adoptive parents who do not have any close ties with children whom they have adopted is put, being abroad; at the same time the adopted children continued to remain in orphanage after their adoption. Provisions of Article 8 of the Convention on human rights protection and fundamental freedoms are applicable to the this case. Information on the resolution of ECHR of 22.06.2004). Byulleten’ Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka (The Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights), 2004, no. 11. ATP «Consultant» [electronic resource] (in Russian).
  16. Vseobschaya deklaratsiya prav cheloveka. Prinyata rezolyutsiei 217 A (III) General’nou Assamblei OON ot 10 dekabrya 1948 goda (Universal declaration of human rights. It is accepted by the resolution 217 A (III) of the United Nations General Assembly of December 10, 1948). Available at: http://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/declarations/declhr (accessed 2 July 2016) (in Russian).
  17. Po delu o proverke konstitutsionnosti punkta 1 chasti tret’ei stat’i 31 Ugolovno-protsessual’nogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii v svyazi s zhaloboi grazhdanki A. S. Lymar’: postanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 25.02.2016 № 6-P [On the case of check of constitutionality of point of 1 part of the third article 31 of the Code of penal procedure of the Russian Federation in connection with the claim of the citizen A. S. Lymar. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 25.02.2016 no. 6-P). Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF [Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation], 2016, no. 10, art. 1476 (in Russian).
  18. Po delu o proverke konstitutsionnosti chasti chetvertoi stat’i 261 Trudovogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii v svyazi s zhaloboi grazhdanina A. E. Ostaeva: postanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 15.12.2011 № 28-P [On the case of check of constitutionality of part of the fourth article 261 of the Labor code of the Russian Fe deration in connection with the claim of the citizen A. E. Ostayev. Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation from 15.12.2011 no. 28-P]. Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF [Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation], 2011, no. 52, art. 7639 (in Russian).
  19. Po delu o proverke konstitutsionnosti polozhenii chasti vtoroi stat’i 170 i chasti vtoroi stat’i 235 Kodeksa zakonov o trude Rossiiskoi Federatsii i punkta 3 stat’i 25 Federal’nogo zakona «O professional’nykh soyuzakh, ikh pravakh i garantiyakh deyatel’nosti» v svyazi s zaprosami Zernogradskogo raionnogo suda Rostovskoi oblasti i Tsentral’nogo raionnogo suda goroda Kemerovo: pos tanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo suda RF ot 24.01.2002 № 3-P [On the case of check of constitutionality of provisions of part of the second article 170 and part of the second article 235 of the Labor code of the Russian Federation and point 3 of article 25 of the Federal law «About Labor Unions, Their Rights and Guarantees of Activities» in connection with requests of Zernogradsky district court of the Rostov region and the Central district court of the city of Kemerovoю Кesolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 24.01.2002 no. 3-P]. Sobranie zakonodatel’stva RF [Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation], 2002, no. 7, art. 745 (in Russian).
  20. Po delu «Amanalak’oai (Amanalachioai) protiv Rumynii» (zhaloba № 4023/04). Po delu obzhaluetsya razryv otnoshenii mezhdu rebenkom i ottsom, sokhranyayuschim roditel’skie prava, posle otkaza deda i babushki v vozvraschenii rebenka posle shkol’nykh kanikul. Po delu narusheny trebovaniya stat’i 8 Konventsii o zaschite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod: informatsiya o postanovlenii ESPCH ot 26.05.2009 («Amanalakyoay (Amanalachioai) against Romania» (claim no. 4023/04). On business the rupture of the relations between the child and the father keeping the parental rights after refusal of the grandfather and the grandmother in return of the child after school vacation is appealed. On business requirements of article 8 of the Convention on protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms are violated). Information on the resolution of ECHR of 26.05.2009). Byulleten’ Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka (The Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights), 2009, no. 10. ATP «Consultant» [electronic resource] (in Russian).
Received: 
19.10.2016
Accepted: 
25.11.2016