The Correlation Between National and International Legislation on Freedom of Religion: Interaction Issues
( Pp. 122-128)

Relevance. Issues of discussion of international and national law have acquired particular relevance in the light of constitutional changes, occurred in 2020 in the Russian Federation. The primacy of national law, enshrined at the level of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, has significantly changed the interaction between the national and international legal order. At the same time, the sphere of freedom of conscience (religion) is one of the most important areas of legal regulation, which has both national and international legal aspects, which determines the relevance of the chosen research goal. The Purpose of the study is to analyze international legal and domestic regulation in the sphere of ensuring the right to freedom of conscience (religion), as well as to identify and resolve urgent problems of interaction of systemic law in the context of the right to freedom of conscience. The research objectives are: 1) determination of the place of the right to freedom of conscience (religion) in the system of international and national legal regulation, in particular, analysis of the concepts of “absolute law”, “jus cogens”, “general international law”; 2) consideration of the issue of the boundaries of freedom of religion in the understanding of the national law of the Russian Federation and international law. As a result of the accomplishment of the task, it is proposed to identify the main differences in this issue between the domestic and international legal order, as well as to put forward proposals to eliminate this discrepancy. Methodology. The key tool was the method of comparative analysis, as well as system analysis. In the course of the study, the main acts of the current legislation of the Russian Federation in the field, the most important international legal acts, the works of prominent specialists in international and constitutional rights were analyzed, a study of law enforcement acts (the practice of the courts of the Russian Federation, the European Court of Human Rights) was carried out. Conclusions. As a result, original conclusions were obtained regarding the need for the doctrinal inclusion of norms on freedom of conscience (religion) in the system of international common law. The conclusion is made about the need for a more complete consideration of the position of international judicial bodies in the legislative movement of the boundaries of the right to freedom of conscience (religion).

Sokolovskiy K.G., (2021), THE CORRELATION BETWEEN NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION ON FREEDOM OF RELIGION: INTERACTION ISSUES. Sociopolitical Sciences, 6 => 122-128.

Petito F. From freedom of religion or belief advocacy to interreligious engagement in foreign policy // Global Affairs. 2020. Vol. 6. Iss. 3. Pp. 269-286.
Annikova N.N., Pokamestova E.Yu. About correlation with national and international law. Territory of science. 2014. No. 1. Pp. 119-123. (In Rus.)
Shelton D. Normative hierarchy in international law // The American Journal of International Law. 2006. Vol. 100. No. 2. Pp. 291-323.
De Santa Mar a P.A.S. The European Union and the law of treaties: A fruitful relationship // The European Journal of International Law. 2019. Vol. 30. № 3. Pp. 721-751.
Madaev E.O. Doctrinal approach to the relationship of national and international law in the light of constitutional amendments. Prologue, journal about the law. 2021. No. 1 (29). Pp. 96-105. (In Rus.)
Lipkina N.N. Features of qualification of international legal standards on human rights as jus cogens. Legal policy and legal life. 2019. No. 3. Pp. 51-55. (In Rus.)
Sinyakin I.I., Skuratova A.Yu. Jus cogens: Historical perspective and contemporary implications for international law. Perm University Bulletin. Legal sciences. 2018. No. 41. Pp. 526-545. (In Rus.)
Anufrieva L.P. The Constitution of the Russian Federation and international law: A theoretical view of the concepts of “generally recognized principles and norms of international law” and jus cogens. Lex Russica. 2018. No. 12 (145). Pp. 37-47. (In Rus.)
Kremnev P.P. Generally recognized principles of general international law in the system of Russian law. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 11: Law. 2018. No. 6. Pp. 19-33. (In Rus.)
Maksimov K.N. Repressions against Buddhist spirituality - carriers of national ideology and spirituality. Caspian region: politics, economics, culture. 2018. No. 3. Pp. 23-29. (In Rus.)
Dovgiy T.P. The problem of the security of Christians in the context of global instability (international perspective). Security problems of Russian society. 2015. No. 4. Pp. 37-44. (In Rus.)
Volkova A.E. The concept of the “dark side of democracy” by M. Mann to explain ethnic cleansing (on the example of Yugoslavia and Ukraine). Problems of the post-Soviet space. 2017. T .4. No. 2. Pp. 159-168. (In Rus.)
Lebedinec I.N. Freedom of conscience is the absolute right of every individual (how freedom of conscience is replaced by freedom to manipulate consciousness). Topical Issues of International Law. 2017. No. 10 (83). Pp. 168-174. (In Rus.)
Ghanea N. Of hedgehogs and representation: Chasing religious persecution in law // The Review of Faith International Affairs. 2018. Vol. 16. Iss. 4. Pp. 116-121.
Raza F. Limitations to the right to religious freedom: Rethinking key approaches // Oxford Journal of Law and Religion. 2020. Vol. 9. Iss. 3. Pp. 435-462.
Isaeva A.A. Limits of freedom of conscience in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Tomsk Government Univesity Bulletin. 2019. No. 448. Pp. 226-231. (In Rus.)
Chakim M.L. The margin of appreciation and freedom of religion: Assessing standards of the European court of human rights // The International Journal of Human Rights. 2020. Vol. 24. Iss. 6. Pp. 850-867.

freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, state and religion, secular state, religious organizations, European Court of Human Rights.