Some aspects of the legal provision of private property nationalization

Objective: to study the current state of the doctrine and legislation on nationalization in order to formulate proposals for improving the legal regulation of public relations in this area.

Methods: the study used such general scientific methods of cognition as analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, and analogy. The logical method of research helped to formulate definitions of some terms, in particular, nationalization and emergency nationalization; their inherent features were identified. While studying the topic, private scientific research methods characteristic of jurisprudence were also used: formal legal and comparative legal methods, which helped to reveal the logic of the legislator and draw conclusions about the expediency of paying compensation when nationalizing property from private owners.

Results: based on the analysis of legislation and the practice of its application, as well as of the Russian and foreign literature, the essence of nationalization was revealed. In the article, nationalization is understood as the acquisition by the state of ownership of property that was privately owned, on the basis of federal law, with or without compensation of the property value to the owner, which is aimed at protecting public interests. The article pays special attention to the understanding of the “state property” category as the property of the whole people, i.e. public property.

Scientific novelty: the article reveals the concept and essence of nationalization, as well as related legal categories (privatization, alienation, compensation, etc.), conducts a comparative legal analysis of the order of nationalization in various states, and identifies the advantages and disadvantages of preliminary and equivalent compensation as a prerequisite for private property nationalization. The author substantiates the need for nationalization of enterprises in all important industries, and, primarily, in the areas of natural monopolies, in which producers can make a profit to ensure their own development only. Nationalization should be soft, with the possibility of compensation, but only after a full audit of the performance of enterprises to resolve the issue of how conscientiously and responsibly their owners and managers acted.

Practical significance: the main conclusions of the article can be used in scientific, pedagogical and practical activities to improve civil legislation and the practice of its application, as well as to develop long-term and short-term strategies for the economic development of Russia.

1. Blanki, Zh. A. (2013). History of political economy in Europe from the ancient till present time. Vol. 1: From the ancient times till the 18th century. Мoscow, Knizhnyi dom “LIBROKOM” (in Russ.).

2. Ostrovityanov, K. V., Shepilov, D. T., Leont'ev, L. A., Laptev, I. D. et al. (1954). Political economy. Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo politicheskoi literatury (in Russ.).

3. Vitryanskii, V. V. et al.; Sukhanov, E. A. (ed.). (2010). Russian civil law: tutorial. In 2 vol. Moscow, Statut. Vol. 1: General part. Law of property. Hereditary law. Intellectual rights. Personal non-property rights (in Russ.).

4. Abramova, E. N. et al.; Sergeeva, A. P. (ed.). (2008). Civil law: tutorial. In 3 vol. Moscow, Velbi. Vol. 1 (in Russ.).

5. Braginskii, M. I. et al. (Eds.). (1995). Commentary on Part 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation for entrepreneurs. Moscow, Fond “Pravovaya kul'tura” (in Russ.).

6. Rozhkov, E. V. (2020). The nationalisation in 2010–2019: social results. Proceedings of Higher Educational Institutions. Sociology. Economics. Politics, 13 (3), 98–107 (in Russ.).

7. Chirkin, E. A., Tolstoy, Yu. K., Yakovlev, V. F. (Eds.). (1989). Law of property in the USSR: Round table of “Juridical Literature” Publishers. Yurid. lit. Ser. Probl., diskussii, predlozheniya (in Russ.).

8. Goncharov, I. A. (2020). State property: theory and interpretation of constitutional rules on property. Education and Law, 10, 132–139 (in Russ.).

9. Avtonomov, A. M. (2002). Constitutional protection of ownership in Russia. Konstitutsionnoe Pravo: Vostochnoevropeiskoe Obozrenie, 3 (40), 125–135 (in Russ.).

10. Bogdanov, E. V. (2020). Challenges of Compulsory Seizure of Private Property by the State through Requisition, Confiscation and Nationalization under the Civil Legislation of Russia. Lex Russica, 73 (2), 25–32 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17803/1729- 5920.2020.159.2.025-032

11. Alenkina, N. B. (2013). Disputable issues of applying the civil law norms on nationalization. Herald of KRSU, 13 (1), 3–8 (in Russ.).

12. Gruzdev, V. V. (2021). Requisition and nationalization as the grounds for the emergence of obligations. Pravo i Ekonomika, 11 (405), 30–36 (in Russ.).

13. Lunts, L. A. (1975). A course in international private law. In 3 vol. Vol. 2: International private law. Special part. Moscow, Yurid. lit. (in Russ.).

14. Vol'f, M. (1948). International private law. Moscow, Gos. izd-vo inostr. lit. (in Russ.).

15. Glinshchikova, T. V. (2018). Compensation as a legal basis for the nationalization of foreign investment. Humanities, Social-Economic and Social Sciences, 4, 89–91 (in Russ.).

16. Baulina, O. A., Klyushin, V. V., Dogadov, A. O. (2019). Theoretical and practical bases of transformation of forms of ownership (on the example of the Russian Federation and foreign countries). The Eurasian Scientific Journal, 5 (11) (in Russ.). https://esj.today/PDF/78ECVN519.pdf

17. Sauma, J., Sanabria, M. (2020, July 21). Compensation for Lawful Nationalization. Jus Mundi. https://blog.jusmundi.com/ compensation-for-lawful-nationalization

18. Sainazarova, P., Saaduev, M. (2011). Nationalization as a Legal Institute and Political Tool in Kyrgyzstan. Kalikova&Associates. http://www.k-a.kg/uploads/Nationalization_as_Legal_Institute_and_Political_Tool_inKG.pdf

19. Filippova, O. (2013). Criminal law regulation of confiscation of property in today’s Russia. Monitoring of Law Enforcement, 4, 29–39 (in Russ.).

20. Danel’yan, A. A. (2014). Problems of nationalization and expropriation of foreign property in international law. Yurist, 6 (in Russ.).

21. Bogdan, V. V. (2017). Public interest law and the concept of dividing the law to private and public: the formulation of the problem. Law and Politics, 7, 110–117 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0706.2017.7.22966

22. Magaramova, K. Sh. (2019). The nationalization of the banking system of the Russian. Federation Economics. Law. State, 1 (3), 13–21 (in Russ.).

23. Rafat, A. (1969). Compensation for Expropriated Property in Recent International Law. Vill. L. Rev., 14, 199. https:// digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol14/iss2/1