Unlawful law: what is it?
After the ancient person learned to think and write, he began to compose rules of the life. Sometimes it turned out very much even not bad: let`s remember ten precepts. Over time laws were multiplied, sometimes conflicted to common sense, and were quite often used to justify permissiveness of the mighty of this world. So there were unlawful laws. Still Karl Marx noted that by means of the law it is possible to legalize the most terrible lawlessness.
Unlawful laws propagate and until now. The right and the law are not same. Lawyers well know that the law, even accepted by the appropriate subject and in a due procedural form, can not have legal contents and express a political arbitrariness. Generally speaking, as unlawful it is considered to be those norms which break the principles of equality and freedom of all people.
In today`s Russia one of examples of the unlawful law is, perhaps, the Code of Administrative Offences (Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences). It is enough to mention its provisions (chapter 12) regulating advantages in the movement or the requirement about total absence of alcohol in blood at drivers. The right of extraordinary journey was reasonable in the Middle Ages when on narrow small streets of the European cities the armed knight could not part with someone else. Time of feudal lords sank into oblivion; streets of the modern cities became very broad. However the Russian officials also until now are proud of feudal privileges, equipping the cars with flashers and special signals, and the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences legalizes their privileges.
As for absolute lack of alcohol in blood at drivers, authors of this innovation do not need to glance in the textbook on normal physiology, and then to be engaged in lawmaking in this area. And so - just showed the ignorance. The norm which is completely ignoring features of a human body resulted.
How to distinguish the legal law from unlawful? There are no exact criteria. But there is the following approach: the more people it is satisfied with contents of this or that law, the it is more than bases to consider such law legal. If the law is equitable to interests of society, then it legal for society at this stage of development. What, however, a conclusion follows from that at some new stage of development the same law can be transformed to unlawful. What society, also its ideas of justice are that.
Other problem is that current laws are subject to unconditional execution. So, also the unlawful law has to be executed. How to resolve this collision? Real way only one: cancellation of any unlawful law. The Constitutional court according to statements of the interested citizens also has to be engaged in it. If the law does not correspond to the constitution, then it has to be recognized as unlawful and is repealed.
At the same time and the constitution as the basic law is not panacea. It is important what in it is written, but it is even more important who and as guarantees its execution. And Socrates was sentenced to death in democratic Athens externally quite lawfully - it was made by 500 members of an Areopagus. Just there were then no norms on freedom of speech, on a freedom of worship and a ban of the death penalty. In 400 years B.C. Socrates was sentenced to death and took tsikuta poison for “worship of new deities“ and “depravity of youth“ . And now? Yes it is practically possible to accuse of similar acts now everyone who serves, for example, in Ostankino. And any poison of a tsikuta...
And all - that such right? One say what is right - it is system of norms. Others go further and consider what is right - it is the arch of the certain fair ideas realized in the public relations and which received standard fixing. And then it turns out that the right is essential at , than set of laws as not all present laws are fair. Some laws are funny and raise only a smile. Somewhere it is forbidden to catch fish, sitting on a horse; somewhere it is considered criminal to sleep, without having taken off boots. And in Russia nobody repealed the Petrovsky decree yet - to inform on everyone who zapershis writes.
And personally I most of all like the ancient norm from the American state of Texas saying: the person who is going to break the law has to warn in writing or orally the victim about the forthcoming violation not less than in 24 hours. I cannot Still understand, legal it is norm or not. But even God punishes nobody, without having warned in advance.