IDEAL MODEL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE BODY (COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SUPREME AND CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS OF THE LEADING COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD) 

Salomatin Aleksey Yur'evich, Doctor of juridical sciences, doctor of historical sciences, professor, head of sub-department of state and law theory and political science, head of the scientific and educational center “Comparative policy of law”, Penza State University (40 Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), valeriya_zinovev@mail.ru 

340.5

Background. Wide spreading of Constitutional Justice over our planet proves its necessity as a key element in the court systems and state mechanism. The experience of different countries demonstrates that Constitutional Courts fulfill important functions concerning state obodies and individuals, defending state unity and constitutional rights of citizens. But what is the ideal model of Constitutional Justice? This article is an attempt to find some kind of an answer or a working hypothesis.
Materials and methods. The research is based upon monographs and articles by Russian and foreign authors and applies the comparative method. The comparison is made between different models of Constitutional Courts. Keeping in mind the typological proximity of the German federative state to the Russian Federation the author puts forward a suggestion that the Constitutional Court is a better solution for Russia than the Supreme Court.
Results. There are many observations about positive and negative features of higher courts in different countries. The US Supreme Court is a unique body with many negative features. The New Supreme Court of Great Britain may be an example of a body with moderate and non-expansionist powers. The Constitutional Council of France is not a court in a pure sense and has rather limited powers. The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany is the best among the represented. The Scandinavian countries refuse to have separate constitutional courts and their position is reasonable.
Conclusions. The author is not ready to make the final recommendation about optimal work of the Constitutional Court in Russia. But some proposals for examination were made, including preserving its reasonable powers, holding discussion seminars with representatives of the Russian legal science. It goes without saying that the Constitutional Court must not position itself as the main court of Russia but only one among the higher courts with limited specific functions.

Constitutional Justice, Constitutional Courts, Supreme Courts, Comparative Analysis of Higher Courts in Different Countries, Ideal Model of Constitutional Justice Body, Optimal Model of Constitutional Court for Russia

1. Nudel' M. A. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v kapitalisticheskikh gosudarstvakh [Constitutional control in capitalistic states]. Moscow, 1968.
2. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v zarubezhnykh stranakh: ucheb. posobie [Constitutional control in foreign countries: tutorial]. Ed. by V. V. Maklakov. Moscow, 2007.
3. Getso R. International Journal of the Sociologi of Law. 2004, vol. 32, no. 2 (June).
4. Williams R. P. The First Congress. March 4, 1789 – March 3, 1791. A Compilation of Significant Debates. New York, 1970, pp. 244–279.
5. Ellis R. E. The Jeffersonian Crisis.Court and Politics in the young Republic. New York, 1971.
6. Surrency E. C. History of the Federal Courts. New York; London, 1987.
7. Salomatin A. Yu., Ageeva E. A. Deyatel'nost' Verkhovnogo Suda SShA v seredine XX v. pod predsedatel'stvom E.Uorrena kak primer bespretsendentnogo sudeyskogo aktivizma [The US Supreme Court activity in the middle of XX century under the chairmanship of E. Warren as an example of unprecedented court activism]. Penza, 2008.
8. Westin A. F. Journal of Politics. 1953, vol. 15 (February).
9. Eggert G. G. Mississippi Valley Historical Review. 1961, vol. 48 (June).
10. Ratner S. American Taxation: Ith History as a Social Force in Democracy. New York, 1942.
11. Starchenko A. A. Filosofiya prava i printsipy pravosudiya v SShA [Philosophy of law and the principles of US justice]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 1969, 120 p.
12. Berlyavskiy L. G. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo [Constitutional and municipalaw]. 2014, no. 2.
13. Rehnquist W. The Supreme Court. New York, 1987.
14. Segal J. A., Spaeth J., Benesh S. C. The Supreme Court in American Legal System. Cambridge, 2006.
15. Robinson N. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 2013, vol. 61, no. 1.
16. Dyevre A. The Amer. Journal of Comparative Law. 2013, vol. 61, no. 4.
17. Konstitutsionnyy kontrol' v zarubezhnykh stranakh: ucheb. posobie [Constitutional control in foreign countries: tutorial]. Ed. by V. V. Maklakov. Moscow, 2007.
18. Veli-Pekka Hautamaki Electronic Journal of Comparative Law. – 2006, vol. 10 (1 June).
19. Jacob H., Blankenburg E., Kritzer H. M., Provine D. M., Sanders J. Courts, Law and Politics in Comparative Perspective. New Haven; London,1996.
20. Zhuykov V. M. Sudebnaya reforma v proshlom i nastoyashchem [Judicial reform in the past and present]. Moscow, 2007.
21. Trunov I. L. Sudebnaya sistema [Court system]. Available at: http://www.trunov.com/content.php? act=showconts.id=4183
22. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya [Russian justice]. 2013, no. 2.
23. Mal'ko A. V., Salomatin A. Yu. Sravnitel'noe pravovedenie: Ucheb.-metod. kompleks [Comparative jurisprudence: Educational-methodological complex]. Moscow, 2008.