Purpose as a Criterion of Faunistic Law Autonomous Status: A Theoretical Aspect

Introduction. Solving the problems of wild animals and their habitat protection requires having the efficiently functioning legal science and practices. However, in the Russian legal system, the place of the faunistic law within the legal framework is insufficiently studied. The problem of determining the differentiation criteria for the branches of law remains disputable. Thus, the fundamental directions of the state and legal policy on protection and rational use of the objects of animal world and their natural habitat have not been fully developed in the existing scientific papers. The present research aims to analyse a purpose as one of the criteria entitling the faunistic law to be considered as an independent area of law.

Materials and Methods. A number of scientific methods and techniques that enabled a more in-depth study of the interdisciplinary relationships between the administrative law, environmental law and theory of law were used to conduct the present research. The analysis of the subject of the research was based on the formally-logical and comparative methods of cognition.

Results. In the frame of the present research, the fundamental purpose of the faunistic law was established as regulation of the relationships in the field of protection and sustainable use of the objects of animal world, as well as preservation of biological diversity. This purpose is a basic attribute that justifies the autonomy of the respective branch of law. During the analysis, the specific features defining the faunistic law targets and effecting both the state and social interests in the frame of using the natural resources, have been identified and comprehensively studied.

Discussion and Conclusion. Studying the purposes of the faunistic law has both theoretical and important practical value. To meet these purposes, it is necessary to have the efficient legal tools and create appropriate conditions for their practical implementation. The proposals and recommendations formulated by the author represent a forward-looking theoretical basis applicable for further scientific research in this area.

1. Ihering R. Understanding a Purpose in Law. Vol. 1. Saint Petersburg: N.V. Murav'ev Publ.; 1881. 412 p. (In Russ.)

2. Prigozhin AI. Goals and Values. New Methods of Working with the Future. Moscow: Delo Publ.; 2010. 432 p. (In Russ.)

3. Kartashev VA. System of Systems. Essays on General Theory and Methodology. Moscow; 1995. 415 p. (In Russ)

4. Myznikova EA. Purposes in Law: Theoretical and Legal Analysis. Cand. Sci. (Law) Dissertation. Krasnodar; 2011. 215 p. (In Russ.)

5. Marchenko MN. (Ed.). General Theory of State and Law. Academic Course: in 3 Volumes. Vol. 3. Moscow: Norma Pabl.; 2010. 698 p. (In Russ.)

6. Krasnova IO. On the System of Environmental Law. Agrarian and Land Law. 2005;(11):7–23. (In Russ.)

7. Kushbokova DA. Necessity and Ways of Preserving Biodiversity in Russia. Intellectual Potential of the 21st Century: Stages of Cognition. 2011;(5–1):25–29. (In Russ.)

8. Drozdov NN, Krivolutskii DA, Lebedeva NV. Modern Concepts on Biological Diversity. Biology for Schoolchildren. 2012;(2):2–17. (In Russ.)

9. Malko AV, Shundikov KV. Purposes and Means in Law and Legal Policy. Saratov: State Educational Institution of Higher Vocational Education “Saratov State Academy of Law” Publ.; 2003. 296 p. (In Russ.)

10. Belyaeva OM. The Purpose of Law and the Purpose in Law: A View through the Prism of R. von Ihering Doctrine. Istoriya gosudarstva i prava (History of the State and Law). 2015;(7):23–27. (In Russ.)

11. Malko AV, Subochev VV. Ensuring Implementation of Legitimate Interests. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Pravovedenie (News of Higher Educational Institutions. Jurisprudence). 2007; (6(275)): 138–148. (In Russ.)

12. Matuzov NI, Malko AV. Theory of State and Law: Textbook. Moscow: Yurist Publ.; 2006. 541 p. (In Russ.)

13. Alekseev SS. Ascent to Law. Searches and Findings. Moscow: Norma Publ.; 2001. 752 p. (In Russ.)

14. Filimonov VD. The Norm of Law and Its Functions. State and Law. 2007;(9):5–12. (In Russ.)

15. Kerimov DA. Philosophical Problems of Law. Moscow: Mysl; 1972. 472 p. (In Russ.)

16. Brinchuk MM. Environmental Law in the Legal System. Astrakhan Bulletin of Ecological Education. 2013;(1(23)):4– 20. (In Russ.)

17. Galligan D, Polyansky VV, Starilov YuN. Administrative Law: History of Development and Main Modern Concepts. Moscow: Yurist Publ.; 2002. 816 p. (In Russ.)

18. Asadov AM, Drakhenberg TV. On the Issue of the Theological Criterion for Differentiation of the Russian Legal System. Bulletin of the Ural Institute of Economics, Management and Law. 2011;3(14):3–9. (In Russ.)