Issue materials

The article addresses several key issues concerning the assessment of contemporary historiography in the philosophy of law and emphasizes the necessity for its advancement, particularly in terms of its conceptual and terminological vocabulary. Historiography holds a programmatic significance for the philosophy of law, serving as a manifestation of critical analysis and as a foundational tool for evaluating the current state and capacity for independent thought within the field. The philosophy of law, whether through alternating or simultaneous existence with pure hypothesis, risks becoming stagnant and disconnected from real-life applications, if does not engage with practical outcomes. It must evolve beyond merely a “logical laboratory” that fails to produce meaningful contributions to science and practice. Therefore, a proper historiography of legal philosophy reflects an intellectual portrait, and serves as a cultural and civilizational passport that encapsulates both universal and national perspectives on law, along with organization of relevant knowledge – whether as theory or practical guidance. One significant challenge in advancing the philosophy of law is the prevalent tendency to rely on schematism, illustrative and allegorical methods to convey ideas. This reliance can distort the potential unity between abstract semantic concepts and figurative characteristics of political and legal knowledge. The inability of concrete philosophy of law to engage in independent thought often reveals itself as symptom of traditional schematism. Furthermore, the cultural and civilizational morphology of the philosophy of law is intricately linked to the role and significance of national language.

Keywords: history of political and legal thought; legal historiography; philosophy of law; morphology of legal language; history of science; withering away of law; national legal literature

The urgency of this research arises from several unexamined aspects in modern criminal law, including the theoretical and practical need to clarify the various areas developed within the criminal law doctrine. This article aims to identify an independent historical school of criminal law in Russia, rooted in the theories by Friedrich Carl von Savigny and other Western scholars, and to delineate its three modifications: historicaldogmatic, historical-philosophical, and historical-comparative. It also seeks to identify key representatives of these areas and their perspectives on the emergence and evolution of criminal law, in particular, regarding their influence on legislation , such as the Penal Code of 1845 and the Criminal Code of 1903.

The first part of this research serves as a propaedeutic introduction to series dedicated to exploring the impact of the historical school of law on Russian criminal law doctrine in the 19th century. It describes this school and outlines the views of its proponents and opponents relevant to this trend in the Russian criminal law. The articles published in the journal State and Law (2025. № 1 and 2) are dedicated to Ivan E. Neiman, one of the founders of the historical school of Russian criminal law, and his prominent students both at the Imperial Kazan University and at the University of Dorpat.

The general purpose of this study is to elucidate how the historical school of law influenced 19th-century Russian criminologists' ideas and their reflection in legislation, particularly in the Code of Penal and Correctional Punishment of 1845 and the Criminal Code of 1903. The specific aim is to demonstrate how this school formed the conceptual foundation for Russian criminal law doctrine during that period. The theoretical framework for this research is grounded in dialectical materialism, supplemented by logical and historical-dogmatic methods.

This article traces the genesis of the historical school of law, examining its causes – including the so-called codification dispute – and describes the views of its most prominent figures: Gustave Hugo, Friedrich Carl von Savigny, and Georg Friedrich Puchta. These scholars recognized “the spirit of the people” as a source of law while critiquing Anton Friedrich Justus Thibaut. The assessments by Rudolf von Ihering, Otto Friedrich von Gierke, and other notable scholars are also presented. Furthermore, it explores how representatives from Russian legal history – such as Pavel I. Novgorodtsev, Sergei A. Muromtsev, and Nilkolai A. Kareev – perceived this school’s significance for both Russian law generally and criminal law specifically. Contemporary legal scholars' perspectives on the essence of discussions between historical and philosophical schools are also included (e.g., Valentina V. Emikh).

Main Conclusions: 1) Characterizing the historical school as foundational to Russia's 19th-century criminal law doctrine necessitates focusing on its key concept – the national spirit – which reflects national legal consciousness while contrasting it with natural law theories. 2) The division within this general theory into branches helps explain the emergence of three relatively independent areas within Russian criminal law thought: historical-dogmatic, historical-philosophical, and historical-comparative. 3) Analyzing criminal law doctrine requires consideration of Puchta's views on universal legal history to highlight differences between his ideas and those held by Russian criminologists aligned with the historical school. 4) The study of philosophical trends in Russian criminal law should be contextualized within fundamental differences among representatives of the historical school itself as well as between this theory and philosophical schools.

Keywords: criminal law; schools; historical school of law; conceptual foundations; Savigny; Puchta; the importance of historical school of law; historical school in Russian literature; discussion between historical and philosophical schools of law

The article aims to explore the scientific and creative legacy of Dr. Vladimir F. Chizh, a prominent figure in the Russian anthropological school of criminal law from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Being an original thinker from the Silver Age, Dr. Chizh recognized the conceptual significance of recent discoveries in a number of natural and exact sciences, including anthropology, psychology, physiology, and statistics. In addition to that, he deemed the practical application of these discoveries essential in areas of social life that had previously been overlooked by scientific inquiry. For Dr. Chizh, one such area of interest was the world of crime, whose causes and evolving nature are illuminated by emerging interdisciplinary fields, such as criminal anthropology and forensic psychopathology. The article provides a brief overview of the life and work of Dr. Vladimir F. Chizh, along with his perspectives on the goals and objectives of criminology and related disciplines. It addresses two main areas: firstly, those mental and cultural stereotypes that hinder the development of scientific knowledge about crime; and secondly, an exploration of the concepts, principles and methods that could effectively contribute to this field. While Dr. Chizh acknowledged the fundamental approaches of Western criminology, particularly the principles of Cesare Lombroso, he maintained a critical stance and emphasized the necessity of thorough empirical verification for any speculative claims. The author argues that reintroducing Vladimir F. Chizh’s ideas into contemporary socio-cultural and political-legal discourse holds significant historiographical value and enhances our understanding of current issues stemming from criminal activities, revealing their origins and identifying optimal solutions.

Keywords: Vladimir F. Chizh; Russian anthropological school of criminal law; criminal anthropology; forensic psychopathology; Lombrosianism; criminal type 

This article argues for the necessity of constructing a historiography of political and legal doctrines that facilitates an understanding of phenomena permeating various stages of Russian history and significantly influencing the present. The author identifies one of the most important phenomena in this context as the Russian schism, a term prevalent in Russian public discourse. While legal literature primarily analyzes the Russian schism in relation to the church reform of the 17th century, the historiography of political and legal thought on this topic should extend beyond historical and legal studies. The Russian schism encompasses more than a religious dimension; it also represents a complex socio-cultural phenomenon that reflects main issues related to socio-economic, political, legal and spiritual development of the country. As a multifaceted socio-cultural phenomenon reflecting the unique historical trajectory of Russia, the Russian schism requires a comprehensive exploration within the historiography of domestic political and legal thought. This exploration should include studies from related fields that address its legal aspects. Adopting this interdisciplinary approach, the article provides an overview and analysis of how the Russian schism has been addressed in the historiography of domestic social sciences.

Keywords: Russian schism; historiography; interdisciplinary approach; Russian Empire; USSR; modern Russia

The idea of forming an integration association in the post-Soviet space has been in development for more than three decades. The first significant step in this direction was the signing of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Commonwealth of Independent States on December 8, 1991. Since then, concepts surrounding “integration building” have fluctuated, leading to the conclusion of various international treaties, yet many norms remain unimplemented and only exist on paper. Employing a retrospective method reveals that each new phase of interstate cooperation in the Eurasian space has been driven by external challenges. In the late 2010s, a renewed impetus for integration emerged, culminating in the signing of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union in 2014. Despite this treaty having reached its 10th anniversary in 2024, Russian academia is still lacking an independent scientific field dedicated to studying integration processes. An inductive approach shows that integration is primarily analyzed from an economic perspective; however, legal scholarship must also develop concepts related to legal integration, which, while connected to economic aspects, are not synonymous with them. Moreover, current studies tend to examine Eurasian integration in a “mechanical” manner, focusing on the individual branches of law that have been transferred to the level of the integration association and its institutions. The science of international law often emphasizes comparative studies of integration association law, rather than analyzing Eurasian Economic Union legal order specifically. Additionally, there is a lack of exploration into the value foundations of Eurasian Integration. Addressing these gaps holds significant theoretical and practical importance, as it can shape understanding of Eurasian Economic Union, establish a doctrinal basis for its rule of law, and influence how member states’ institutions interpret and apply this body of law.

Keywords: Eurasian Economic Union; Commonwealth of Independent States; integration; values; internal market

This article examines the activities of the Inter-American Human Rights System in protecting the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Peru. The analysis of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights is evolving alongside the practical activities of the system, significantly influencing the legal frameworks of American States and their Indigenous populations. While much of the existing literature focuses on the verdicts of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in controversial cases, previous studies have often overlooked the contributions of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Indigenist Institute. The article analyses specific cases, including “Cayara”, “Community of San Mateo de Huanchor and its members”, “Rural Community of Santa Barbara” and “Community of La Oroya”, highlighting how these cases have led to measures aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of the Indigenous Rights protection in Peru. In addition, it explores historical aspects of Peru's relationship with Indigenous Peoples’ law within the framework of the Inter-American system for Human Rights protection. While much attention has been given to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ ruling the case of “Rural Community of Santa Barbara”, an insufficient attention has been paid to the work of the Inter-American Commission regarding other cases and various ethnic rights, including gender-related issues and rights concerning voluntary isolation. Thus, this article aims to identify key elements and conclusions regarding standards of protecting the Rights of Peruvian Indigenous Peoples within the Inter-American System. In conclusion, it emphasizes that contemporary regulations governing these rights and fundamental freedoms must align with definitions established by the Inter-American Commission.

Keywords: American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man; Indigenism; Inter-American Human Rights System; Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; Peru; Indigenous Rights