The practice of modernizing Russian society at the end of the 20th century has shown that one of the powerful destabilizers in the sphere of legal order is the widening gap between the nature of social transformations and the spiritual and moral potential of the country from year to year. The most disturbing background of modernization was a sharp disorganization, figuratively speaking, of the "spiritual hoops" and foundations of life for Russians. In these conditions, the search for innovative, renewal-oriented approaches is becoming increasingly important, both in relation to the activities of law enforcement agencies and in relation to the entire arsenal of methods and tools used by them. The technologies of development and improvement of the legal order themselves, as well as their target component, also need innovative courage.
Assessing the changes that are taking place both in the state-political structures of Russian society and in its law enforcement agencies, it should be noted that the rethinking of priorities in their activities does not yet correspond to the needs and scale of the country's democratization. Until now, law enforcement agencies are most often considered exclusively as an institution of the state, part of its executive structures, an instrument of forceful influence on certain groups of society ("breaking the law"). Law enforcement agencies often see only a force that opposes crime. Such a vision greatly narrows down the real role of law enforcement agencies, whose vocation is not so much to suppress and stop delinquent activities, but rather to create a legal order and protect the rights and freedoms of individuals and society. These goals are defined by law in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The noted inconsistency between ingrained views on legal institutions and requests for the development of legal bodies leads to certain contradictions between the legislative foundations of their activities and the existing theoretical views on the content of this activity.
In fact, law enforcement agencies remain primarily concerned with combating crime, and they see this struggle as the main and defining reference point. This function still sets the main structural and content parameters of their activities. At the same time, everything that lies "outside" the fight against crime is often perceived as secondary, less significant, which is expressed not only in practical forms, but also fixed in theory and ideology. Human rights functions are still the work of other organizations (non-governmental, by the way).
Such a situation remains unconscious and is accepted as normal. So, summing up
page 51
the authors of a textbook prepared at Moscow State University identify three main approaches to understanding the purpose and role of law enforcement agencies in the country: for some researchers, these are those that directly fight crime, for others-those that eliminate crimes and other encroachments, and for others-those that maintain order in public places (1), it can be noted that the difference in these positions is insignificant and fits into a rather narrow paradigm - linking the activities of law enforcement agencies only with criminal manifestations in society. Further, the paper also offers an additional criterion for law enforcement activity, its classification - the specific weight of detecting and investigating crimes in the total mass of powers of a particular body. The position is very clearly defined and expresses the prevailing stereotypical ideas.
This angle of vision actually emasculates a broader social and cultural aspect of the activities of law enforcement agencies, distancing them from the needs of society, and narrowing their status. Moreover, this vision leads to hypertrophy of the power principle in the activities of the relevant structures. Law enforcement agencies seem to focus only on the segment of social life that is represented by deviant behavior, and the legal institutions themselves are thus outside of "normal" social processes.
It is far from harmless to often emphasize that the Russian Interior Ministry is a purely "power structure". At the same time, its militarization is perceived as the main, strategic direction for its improvement. Indirectly, the law itself, which should be the primary concern of this body of the state, is associated only with force, with the punitive component of state activity. Creative, positive work to strengthen and develop the legal consciousness seems to "fall out". With this approach, the internal affairs bodies appear in the image of a kind of overseers. And if in the recent past such a role of law enforcement agencies was quite justified both politically and ideologically (since the idea of the class nature of the state prevailed), then in the context of the rejection of authoritarian and totalitarian principles, the continuing view of the internal affairs bodies as an institution of intimidation and punishment of all those who do not obey the authorities russians.
A narrow-minded, "repressive" understanding of the tasks of law enforcement agencies contributes to the growth of their alienation from society. The tendency to conceal relevant information also plays a role here, which is not always functionally justified. The militarization of law enforcement agencies hinders a flexible response to the ongoing complication of the legal situation, makes it difficult to interact with public associations.
As a result, there is a mismatch between society, its socio-cultural needs and interests, and the activities of law enforcement agencies, a mismatch, without eliminating which, first of all, legal progress and the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies are impossible. Overcoming this gap is possible only by identifying and implementing in practice the interests and goals shared by law enforcement agencies with other social actors and State structures.
A common goal and socio-cultural platform that expresses the interests of both state and primarily law enforcement agencies and organizations, as well as labor, territorial and religious groups of Russians, can be the stabilization of legal relations and the achievement of a stable legal order in Russia. A stable rule of law is a state of society in which all spheres of public life and their corresponding relations are regulated by social norms that correspond to the current legislation. The ways and forms of settlement of relations in this case can be not only legal, but also legal.
1. Gutsenko K. F., Kovalev M. A. Law enforcement agencies, Moscow, 1996, pp. 13-15.
page 52
having other reasons, including cultural ones (traditions, customs, moral preferences). But in general, the stability of the legal order is expressed in a state of society in which the priority of compliance by citizens, state and public institutions, their representatives and employees with the current legislation is effectively implemented. This implies that the legislation itself adequately reflects the interests and needs of the social culture, priorities and preferences of citizens. A stable legal order is unattainable without certain changes in the spiritual, moral, ideological and legal foundations of social groups, in the values and level of legal culture of citizens, without awareness and voluntary fulfillment by the absolute majority of their duties to society and the Russian state.
To achieve this state of affairs, it is necessary for state institutions, primarily law enforcement agencies, to work systematically and purposefully to form and develop a specific legal policy that corresponds to an ideology with clearly defined, real and specifically implemented tasks in the field of legal culture of both the Russian society and its citizens. After all, in the end, it is not the state, but society that is the bearer and subject of law and order. Therefore, it is important to work with the population within a certain territory, in labor, educational, public and private institutions to involve them in the protection of public order, to involve the public in improving the situation of penitentiary institutions. It is also important to revive the experience already accumulated in the past, taking into account the changed situation (club and patronage work, for example).
The development of societal elements (focused on strengthening community-based elements that unite society) is not just a matter for law enforcement agencies. In the end, it is time to realize that it is not the law enforcement agencies that determine the state of legal relations and crime. And it is not the level of work, not the professionalism of the relevant structures, not their conscientiousness that "sets" the legal situation, but the state of society, the well-being of citizens, their normative and value culture. Modern sociological studies, which are conducted in a number of scientific areas, using various methods and paradigms, record this circumstance. The degree of unity of people in social groups, their cohesion (collectivity), as noted by the authors of one of the works on sociology, the unity of their positions is inversely proportional to the number of offenses. If the degree of unity (integration) of a social group (class, society) increases, then the number of deviations in the behavior of members of these groups decreases, and, conversely, an increase in the number of deviations in behavior is an indicator of a weakening of the integration of a social group (2). Because of this, it is the factors that contribute to the development of common, integrative principles in society based on positive value attitudes that are particularly important in the processes of localization and reduction of offenses. Social and cultural activities are the key to solving the problems of law and order.
Reorientation to the socio-cultural component in the activities of law enforcement agencies proceeds from the fact that the main field of application of the efforts of the relevant structures should not be the criminal environment, but social groups and communities. From this point of view, the organization of systematic activities together with the media to develop the legal culture of citizens takes on a different meaning.
Highlighting the socio-cultural orientation in the activities of law enforcement agencies, special attention should be paid to one of the powerful destabilizers of social relations - uncontrolled violence (violence itself is understood as deliberate damage to a person, his health or property), which, unfortunately, accompanies not only crimes, but also often the escalation of social conflicts, in part and partly as a result of the actions of the police and internal affairs bodies in
2. Sociology. Osnovy obshchey teorii [Fundamentals of General theory], Moscow, 1966, pp. 243-244.
page 53
operations to localize social conflicts or perform other similar functions. Using force, employees of the relevant structures do not always take into account that the Department of Internal Affairs is closely monitored by public opinion, which most often does not support such forms of activity. These forms are both ineffective and illegitimate, and do not correspond to the socio-cultural situation in modern Russian society.
Violence is a source and indicator of instability in the rule of law. The prospects for the socio-cultural dynamics of modern society correspond to the active development and use of such techniques that would be focused on the conscious rejection of the use of physical force that causes damage to people and their property, nonviolent methods. Nonviolent actions have a wide range in the activities of law enforcement agencies, which can be expanded by strengthening work in this direction.
Among the most significant forms that provide nonviolent technologies, we should first of all include cooperation, dialogue, interaction with the public (especially during periods of exacerbation of social conflicts), and openness of information channels. The practice of the 1990s has clearly shown that in the long run, strategically and informationally, the side that ultimately loses out is the one that hides information from society to a greater extent than is functionally necessary. The attitude of excessive secrecy only increases distrust and anxiety towards the subjects who practice it. There is a potential source of violence here. Conversely, the maximum possible information activity increases the level of mutual trust and reduces the likelihood of violent actions when interacting with social groups.
To implement nonviolent methods, a number of preventive measures are needed, which, in my opinion, could help reduce the risk of using force in resolving conflicts in which law enforcement agencies are involved. These measures imply compliance with certain principles: the most important element of conflict resolution is the purposeful activity of state and civil institutions to prevent (or at least minimize) social, including interethnic, tensions between different groups and segments of the population; in the case of conflict confrontation, all available channels of interaction with the public (city, collective, locality) are used. first of all, it is important for the media to carry out systematic and regular work to prevent violence in mass actions; in cases of forced use of force, it is important to explain through the media the nature of the measures taken, to recognize the facts of violations (if any) law enforcement agencies, bringing the results of investigations of violations to the attention of citizens; in the interests of law and order, it is advisable to monitor social tensions by independent sociological services; it is necessary to train law enforcement officers in nonviolent methods of activity, to study the relevant experience in the work of both Western police services and domestic divisions and structures.
The further legal development of Russia and the corresponding legal order can no longer be guided by purely state and departmental interests if the goal is to achieve the quality of sustainability in the field of law. To this end, the socio-cultural orientation of the legal order implies a reduction in the power component of activities in favor of nonviolent methods where this is possible and effective. The socio-cultural orientation of legal bodies also implies clarifying strategic goals and priorities in the activities of legal bodies. An anthropological and cultural turn in the field of law is needed.
If we assess the situation in the country without bias, we have to admit that a stable legal order in the very near future in Russian society will be established
page 54
unreachable. The transition period and the transitional society themselves determine the instability of social reality, which is not easily regulated by means of legal regulation. At the same time, the development of the potential of law and the legal consciousness of citizens is quite an objective and obvious process. The interests of society strongly require us to work not only for the present day, but also to keep in mind strategically significant tasks and goals. As a purely forceful, rigid and mostly paramilitary structure, law enforcement agencies exist and are perceived to some extent as a relic (somewhat justified and even tolerated), which is not associated with the future. As a rationally organized and coordinating institution for the creation and construction of a legal order focused on the security and development of the individual, they are an essential element of the progressive transformation of Russian society.
page 55
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2017-2025, BIBLIO.KZ is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Kazakhstan |