Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject

of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation

Alexei V. Telnov

Department of Civil Law and Litigation and Private International Law of the Law Institute of the FSAEI HE "Peoples'

Friendship University of Russia", Moscow, Russia

Keywords: Intangible Benefits, Personal Non-property Rights, Reputation, Defamation, Dissemination of Untrue

Damaging Information.

Abstract: The subject of research of this article is the regulations of civil legislation, controlling intangible benefits,

personal non-property rights, the rights of the Russian Federation as an independent participant in civil law

relations, as well as the provisions of the legal doctrine, that study the relevant objects of civil rights. The

purpose of this research is to study the current state of public relations, associated with such a type of

intangible benefits as reputation, and the personal non-property right of the Russian Federation to this benefit,

which is associated with multiple situations, associated with the dissemination of untrue damaging

information, regarding the Russian state, concerning various fields of its activity. The methodological basis

of the study consists of general scientific and special methods, in particular, theoretical, comparative-legal,

method of analysis, and synthesis. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the fact, that on the basis of

existing knowledge in the field of litigation practice, the provisions of judicial practice, the necessity of a

legislative definition of reputation as a separate type of intangible benefits and the personal non-property right

of the Russian Federation to reputation is substantiated, the applicability of the reputation as an object of

protection in defamation regarding the Russian Federation, as well as the concept and content of the given

personal non-property right of the Russian Federation to reputation are determined.

INTRODUCTION

Our state is currently in a difficult situation, when

more and more often untrue damaging materials are

disseminated regarding it in the media, both inside the

country and abroad, concerning it in completely

different fields of its activity, for example, such like

sports, history, politics or culture. Here we can give

as an example the accusations of Russia in the

poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the UK, as

well as the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny,

and indications of interference in the election

campaign of the US President in 2016, and reproaches

for initiating the Second World War, and the

imposition of responsible for the outbreak of the new

coronavirus infection COVD-19. There are other

examples as well.

These cases of dissemination of information are

exactly defamation, i.e. the dissemination of untrue

damaging information regarding Russia as a state,

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5877-7432

since they are based on unverified, unconfirmed

information, and also, often, on assumptions and

speculation. At first glance, it seems, that these cases

are only the private opinions of individuals, expressed

within the framework of freedom of expression,

enshrined in Art. 10 of the 1950 Convention for the

protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms

and Art. 29 of the Constitution of the Russian

Federation of 1993, which should not be the subject

of special attention. But, over the past 5-7 years, there

have already been a lot of such cases, which forms a

general negative background around the country.

Moreover, the given materials, after their publication,

become the basis for applying real economic and

political sanctions to the Russian Federation, entail

deterioration of trade relations with other countries,

depriving it, on an equal footing with other countries,

of the opportunity to participate in sports

competitions, etc. (Inshakova, A.O., Frolova, E.E.,

Rusakova, E.P., Galkina, M.V., 2020), as a result of

104

Telnov, A.

Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation.

DOI: 10.5220/0010662700003224

In Proceedings of the 1st International Scientiﬁc Forum on Jurisprudence (WFLAW 2021), pages 104-113

ISBN: 978-989-758-598-2

which irreparable and significant material and

intangible damage is caused, not only to Russia in the

international arena and within the country, but also to

all subjects - legal entities and individuals, belonging

to the Russian jurisdiction. It seems, that the common

purpose of the above publications, which have no

proper foundation, is the opportunity to undermine,

destabilize the position of Russia and reduce its

reputation in the eyes of the world community.

It is necessary to properly respond to these cases

of dissemination of damaging materials in order for

the country to be able to show the public the true

nature of certain events, to shatter illusions, that

prevail at the moment in public opinion, formed under

the influence of the media, and not only to preserve

its position at the international level, but also to

strengthen its position in the eyes of other states and

within Russia, including in the eyes of its citizens. If

these actions are not taken, then the inaccurate nature

of the widespread damaging information will become

global and all around, which will affect, among other

things, the attitude towards ordinary Russian citizens,

who will feel embarrassed for their country and will

be ashamed of being Russians. In support of this point

of view about the repeated dissemination of untrue

information, one can point to a quote, attributed to the

French writer and diplomat of the 18-19th centuries

Francois René de Chateaubriand, who noted that “A

lie, repeated a thousand times, becomes true”.

Based on all this, an urgent need arose to protect

the Russian Federation, as an equal right subject of

civil law, from cases of dissemination of damaging

information, that does not correspond to reality. To do

this, first of all, it is required to legislatively introduce

such a new type of intangible benefits as reputation,

since it is currently formally absent in civil legislation,

as well as to determine the personal non- property

right of Russia to the mentioned intangible benefit,

which has a general social character, and to

doctrinally study, what the above right represents.

Without the introduction at the legislative level of

the aforementioned type of intangible benefit and the

personal non-property right of the Russian Federation

to a reputation, it is really impossible to carry out

actions, related to the protection of the state from

numerous violations. At the same time, the

introduction of such a type of intangible benefit as

reputation will allow for the regulatory support of the

subsequent development of legislation in terms of

strengthening the reputation of the state, increasing

the level of its special protection from defamation and

other violations. It is possible to say, that the

legislative introduction of the above type of

intangible benefit and the introduction of a new type

of personal non-property right of Russia to reputation

will be the legal basis for the protection, provision and

further strengthening, not only of the non- property

rights of the state, but also of the non- property rights

of all constituent entities of the Russian Federation,

including citizens and legal entities of this

jurisdiction, since damage from defamation against

the state actually directly and indirectly affects the

rights of all listed subjects of civil rights (Telnov,

A.V., 2021).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The possibility of the Russian Federation to be a

subject of civil-law relations, both property and

personal non-property, along with other participants

of these relations - individuals and legal entities, and

on an equal basis with these participants, is enshrined

in Cl. 1 of Article 2 of the Civil Code of the RF and

in Cl. 1 of Article 124 of the Civil Code of the RF.

The above indicates, that the state has civil legal

personality, i.e. the existence of a social and legal

opportunity to be a participant in civil property and

personal non-property legal relations, which includes

legal competence - the ability to have civil rights and

obligations in relation to material or immaterial

objects, and legal capacity - the ability to acquire

rights by your actions and bear responsibilities. At the

same time, the state has some specifics of

participation in civil legal relations, in view of which,

in accordance with cl. 1 of Art. 125 of the Civil Code

of the Russian Federation, on behalf of the Russian

Federation, can by their actions acquire and exercise

property and personal non-property rights and

obligations, appear in court, government bodies

within the their competence, established by acts,

determining the status of these bodies.

With regard to the participation of the Russian

Federation in property legal relations and its

possession of property rights, the issue is legally

resolved (for example, one of the signs,

characterizing the state as a subject of civil law is

ringfenced assets and at the legislative level, the

possibility of property being in the ownership of the

state is determined - Article 212 of the Civil Code of

the Russian Federation) and does not cause any

particular disagreement doctrinally. At the same time,

the issues of Russia's ownership of intangible goods

and personal non-property rights to them, as well as

the participation of the state in personal non-property

legal relations, are currently almost unexplored. This

is due to the widespread in the doctrine of a special

approach about belonging of intangible benefits and

Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation

105

personal non-property rights to individuals and legal

entities, and the fact that in respect of Russia "public-

law nature overshadows its civil-law status" (Tolstoj,

V.S., 2009).

However, nowadays, the study of the participation

of the Russian Federation in personal non-property

relations, as an equal participant of civil law relations,

is very relevant, given the provision of cl. 1 of Art.

125 of the Civil Code, directly recognizing for the

state the existence of personal non-property rights.

At the same time, one can only guess, what kind

of personal non-property rights Russia has. If we take

into account the provision of cl. 2 of Art. 124 of the

Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in accordance

with which "The regulations, determining the

participation of legal entities in relations, controlled

by civil law, are applied to the subjects of civil law,

specified in cl. 1 of this article (Russian Federation,

constituent entities of the Russian Federation:

republics, territories, regions, cities of federal

significance, autonomous regions, autonomous

districts, as well as urban, rural settlements and other

municipalities) unless otherwise follows from the law

or the specifics of these entities", it turns out, that the

Russian Federation, as a subject of civil law, can only

have the right to defense business reputation, provided

for in cl. 11 of Art. 152 of the Civil Code of the

Russian Federation.

At the same time, the idea of business reputation

as a phenomenon, related only to subjects engaged in

entrepreneurial and other economic activity, has

developed in the Russian legal doctrine. In particular,

A.R. Gusalova, who understands business reputation

as “a public assessment of the entrepreneurial

qualities of a subject, speaks about this. And the

"subjects of business reputation are subjects of

entrepreneurial activity, i.e. citizens - entrepreneurs

and legal entities” (Gusalova, A.R., 2012) and

researcher U.Z. Sahapov, who states the following:

“If we speak about subject of entrepreneurial activity,

then, of course, to characterize their professional

skills, ability to engage in economic activities, a

general social assessment is not enough. Therefore, in

order to assess the professional qualities of subjects

of entrepreneurial and other economic activity, the

legislator supplements the term "reputation" with a

qualitative and professional criterion. As a result, the

term “business reputation” is obtained (Sahapov,

U.Z., 2007). At the same time, if the activities of

subjects of civil law relations concern their general

social assessment, then the concept of "business

reputation" does not apply to such activities.

It follows from this, that in a situation, where

defamatory information is disseminated against

Russia, which is a negative and untrue assessment of

the state, its business reputation could be damaged if

such information related to the sphere of

entrepreneurship. But, the Russian Federation is the

subject, that carries out its activities not only in this

field. As M.N. Maleina rightly notes: “The

assessment of the state should not be limited solely to

economic indicators, credit rating and be expressed in

money or inventories, although damaging and untrue

information may relate only to such data” (Maleina,

M.N., 2013). In view of this, the name of the

intangible benefit to be protected, as a reputation,

which has a general social orientation, and does not

limit its application exclusively to the business,

economic sphere, is more suitable for the state as a

subject of law, since the Russian Federation is a

participant of many social relations, most of which

are not associated with entrepreneurial activity.

At the same time, the state, represented by the

competent government bodies, in cases where untrue

damaging information, concerning its general social

assessment, is disseminated against it, is forced to use

the adjacent objects, available in legislation, that are

subject to protection, such as "business reputation" ,

"honor", "dignity", "honest name", which does not

quite correspond to their meaning. And if, in

particular, we speak about the categories "honor",

"dignity" and "honest name", then it is possible to say,

that they are more applicable to the life of individuals,

than to the activities of collective subjects of law,

including the activity of the state. So, for example, in

the science of civil law, the idea of honor as a

phenomenon “directed from society to an individual,

to a person” (Kuznecov, N.M., 2009) has developed,

i.e.associated with a person in a subjective sense. The

same can be said about a honest name: “the honest

name of a person, established in public opinion,

inspires respect for him. The latter, being a

phenomenon of consciousness, should be enveloped

in some kind of external forms, with the help of which

it becomes a real, visibly perceived social relation, a

fact of existing morals” (Blyumkin, V.A., 1974). The

category of "dignity" is more different from

reputation, since it is associated with the inner self-

consciousness and self-esteem of a person, i.e. it is

associated with a person's ability to assess and

measure his behaviour and actions with the

requirements of society, the ability to suppress selfish

and immoral aspirations, intentions and desires, the

fulfillment of which could lead to an assessment of a

person as dishonest and unreliable, and in his ability

to act in social life in accordance with generally

accepted requirements, standards and rules of

behavior.

WFLAW 2021 - INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM ON JURISPRUDENCE

106

In judicial practice, there are, of course, cases

when, for example, the honor of public officials (the

President of the Russian Federation, heads of

constituent entities of the Russian Federation, heads

of municipalities) or the honor of a state body and its

head was considered as an object, to which a

defamatory violation was directed and was identified

with the reputation of this or that public entity.

However, it cannot be said, that the reputation of a

public entity in its content corresponds to the honor

or reputation of a particular official or body of this

entity. The reputation of a public entity and the honor

of a public official, a state body are different

intangible benefits, which may not coincide in their

content. The reputation of public entity is seen as a

broader concept and an independent benefit.

Thus, it is the reputation, as an intangible benefit,

that is subject to protection when disseminating

untrue and damaging information against the Russian

Federation in the fields of its activity, that are not

related to the economic field of activity.

When defamatory infringement on the reputation

of the state, the question may arise as to what is the

real object of legal protection. In civil law, two

independent objects of protection are distinguished -

subjective law and interest, protected by law. S.N.

Bratus, defining subjective civil law, noted that

“subjective law is a recognized and legally secured

measure (boundary) of a person's possible behavior in

this particular legal relation” (Bratus, S.N., 1947).

Malein N.S. stands in full solidarity with him: “the

concept of subjective law as a measure of permissible

behavior, the ability to act in a certain way can be

attributed to the generally recognized concept”

(Malein, N.S., 1981), Yu.K. Tolstoy, who defined

subjective law as “a measure of possible behavior in

this legal relations, assigned to the person, authorised

to satisfy his interests, secured by the imposition of

duties on other persons” (Tolstoj, U.K., 1959), and

S.S. Alekseev, who believes, that “subjective law is a

measure of permissible behavior, belonging to the

subject, provided by the state” (Alekseev, S.S., 1999).

As noted by N.I. Matuzov, “when they want to say

about any right, belonging to a particular person, the

subject, wishing to emphasize the “personal”,

“individual” nature of this right, they resort to the

term “subjective law”, which basically correctly

define and expresses a legal phenomenon, its essence,

because by this, sort of, it is briefly stated, that this is

not about legal regulations, not about laws and other

normative acts, but about the rights, belonging to

certain persons, subjects” (Matuzov, N.I., 1966).

The concept of a legally protected interest is less

studied in the science of civil law, since such an

interest is not included in the content of civil legal

competence (Articles 17-18 and 49 of the Civil Code

of the Russian Federation), is not included in the

number of objects of civil rights (Article 128 of the

Civil Code of the Russian Federation) and is not

mentioned as an intangible benefit (Article 150 of the

Civil Code of the Russian Federation). At the same

time, A.A. Eroshenko understands by a legally

protected interest “the legally provided striving of the

subject to achieve those benefits, the possession of

which is permitted by the state and is ensured by

providing a person with legal opportunities of a

certain type” (Eroshenko, A.A., 1977). N.S. Malein

believes that “a legally protected interest is a right of

a general type, which is possessed not by one specific

subject, but by all or a certain category of citizens, ie.

it is one of the elements of the general capacity for

ownership, which constitute the content of legal

competence. However, not all elements of legal

competence are equally legally warranted. Some of

them have maximum legal guarantees, thanks to

which they acquire signs of legal rights, others are

legally warranted to a lesser extent and constitute the

category of legitimate interests” (Malein, N.S., 1985).

In fact, the legal status of legal right is established

for those material or intangible benefits, the position

of which in an undisturbed state directly depends on

the will of the possessing subject. In relation to

intangible benefits, this concerns, for example, the

non-property right of authorship of a person to a

musical work, which allows the author of a work to

give the rights for its temporary or permanent use to

another person. Or the right to privacy, which implies,

that a person is entitled to give information about his

private life to someone or keep it secret.

At the same time, it is believed, that the status of

legal right cannot be established in relation to those

benefits, that “are objectified only in the process of

violating the universal obligation not to perform

certain actions, confirmed in legislation, and are not

an object of public relations, that existed before the

violation” (Nohrina, M.L., 2004). That is, "for such

benefits as personal security, honor, dignity,

favorable environment, the legal status of interest,

protected by law, is sufficient."

However, if we speak about public relations,

associated with the reputation of Russia, then, in order

to give the possibilities of its use, protection and

strengthening of a real legal form, it is necessary to

consider such relations not as exclusively protective,

i.e. arising only in the event of an infringement on the

reputation of the state, but it is required to establish

the legal status of subjective civil law corresponding

to their nature, indicating its content, limits of

Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation

107

exercise and protection (Senchishchev, V.I., 1988).

Subjective civil law, as a general rule, takes under its

secure and protection those interests, that are

recognized as the most important, essential for

society and the state in order to allow the subject of

the right to exercise it and defend it in case of

violations (Miroshnichenko, O.I., Samusenko, T.M.,

Gaivoronskaya, Ya.V., Frolova, E.E., 2018).

Therefore, it is the structure of subjective civil law,

that will allow to properly secure for the state such an

object of civil law as reputation, which is actually

inherent in it, but requiring legal confirmation, legal

control and protection in connection with the

emerging social need – numerous cases of

dissemination of damaging materials against the state.

In this regard, it is necessary to disagree with R.O.

Khalfina, who believed, that “it is pointless to

establish a subjective right to the reputation (honest

name) of an individual and a non-profit organization,

that does not carry out entrepreneurial activity, since

these benefits are inseparable from the owners, and

the possibility of their illegal use is practically

excluded. Therefore, the legal status of interest,

protected by law, is quite sufficient for them”

(Timerhanov, A.A., 2013). This approach follows

from the point of view, that civil law, as a branch of

law, does not control personal non-property relations

regarding intangible benefits, but only secures them

(protects), which is based on cl. 2 of Art. 2 and cl. 2

of Art. 150 of the Civil Code of the Russian

Federation and proceeds only from the possibility of

protecting intangible benefits, but not from their

"positive" controlling. But, civil law personal non-

property relations are “legal bonds between subjects

about the nonmaterial benefits, belonging to the

individual. Such social and legal bonds (relations)

exist regardless of their violation, i.e. untill there is a

need to protect them”, and “personal rights have a

very definite positive content, citizens have these

rights regardless of their violation; the relations

between the subject of the law and the obligated

persons is controlled by the regulations of law also

untill there is a violation”.

From the foregoing, the issue of the content of the

right of the Russian Federation to a reputation follows

quite logically, i.e. what exactly opportunities are

available to the subject having such a right, namely,

the state, regarding reputation, as well as whether

there is a right of the state to reputation before

encroachment on it.

As a general rule, the content of law “includes the

processes, associated with its effect on social

relations. The content of the law also includes the

possible and proper behavior of people, stipulated by

its regulations”. There is no consensus in the doctrine,

regarding the authorities, that are part of subjective

civil law. Scientists distinguish two main authorities

- the authority to act on their own and the requirement

for an obliged person to perform certain actions, or

three authorities, when the authority to protect a

subjective right (claim) is also added to the above

(Aleksandrov, N.G., 1955). There is also a point of

view according to which the possibility of using a

social benefit is added to these authorities as an

independent structural element of subjective law

(Matuzov, N.I., 1972).

It seems, that the right to reputation, as a

subjective right, should proceed from the triple

structure of its constituent authorities, which implies

"the possibility of one's own actions, the ability to

demand certain behavior from obligated persons and

the opportunity to seek support and protection of the

violated right". I.e. the content of the studied

subjective law should proceed not only from the

"negative content", which includes only the possibility

to demand non-acting, that violate the law, addressed

to an unlimited number of persons (Belyavskij, A..V,

Pridvorov, N.A., 1971), but also from the "positive

content" of subjective law, including the possibility of

an interested subject's own actions regarding the

intangible benefit, belonging to him.

The authority to take its own actions, which is

structurally included in the subjective right of the

state to reputation, supposes, that the state, acting in

the prescribed manner through the competent

government bodies, has this intangible benefit, and

has the right to independently carry out actions,

including the formation (improvement) and use of its

reputation within the framework of behavior,

stipulated by the current legislation of the Russian

Federation, and, as a result, to gain any necessary

advantages from it.

Within the above, it is implied, that the Russian

Federation has, first of all, the main authority to own

a reputation, which means that an intangible benefit

belongs to the state. In this regard, one cannot agree

with the opinion on the application of the

understanding of the right of ownership to personal

rights, proceeding from the property (proprietary)

right, that “possession is a physical control over a

thing, an object”. The authority of ownership, coming

from the personal non-property right, differs in its

meaning from the property (proprietary)

understanding of the right of ownership, and

represents a close, inextricable connection of an

intangible good with a specific subject, which does

not necessarily should be based on a sense of touch

(tactile sense) about a certain object. It should be

WFLAW 2021 - INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM ON JURISPRUDENCE

108

noted, that if the state did not have the right to own its

reputation, then it would be impossible to carry out,

for example, actions to refute the widespread untrue

damaging information, that does not correspond to

reality, since it would not be possible to prove the

connection of the widespread untrue damaging

information with the state. Thus, the authority to own

a reputation determines the accessory of the

reputation of the state and the ability of the state to

take actions to form (improve), use and protect the

reputation from any encroachment.

From the authority to own its reputation follows

the authority of the state to use it, which consists in

the actions, that Russia can perform, using the

specified intangible benefit, as well as in relation to

it. In this regard, “the use of the benefit should be

understood in a broad sense. It can consist not simply

and not necessarily in the possession of certain things,

values, objects, but also in the very freedom of

behavior, in the freedom of actions and deeds, which

in itself is a benefit, only intangible” (Hohlova, E.M.,

2014).

Such actions will consist, for example, in the

ability to use the long-standing reputation in their

activities, taking as a basis the idea of oneself,

existing in society, in any of the spheres of activity.

For example, based on the fact, that our country has

been famous for a very good preparation of musicians

for a long time, the Ministry of Culture has the

opportunity to organize international festivals and

competitions of musical art, which are of great

interest to foreign participants.

Actions for the use of reputation can also include

the implementation of actions for self-presentation

and formation (improvement) of reputation, aimed at

changing the existing reputation for a good side, i.e.

actions to inform other persons, of some specific

government body (bodies), state officials, and about

the state as a whole. Within the above, options for

adoption are possible on the basis of cl. 3 of Art. 125

of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, relevant

acts, by virtue of which such actions can be carried

out by competent state bodies, legal entities and

individuals, or by concluding transactions provided

for, for example, by ch. 37 of the Civil Code of the

Russian Federation (provisions of civil legislation on

the contract), ch. 39 of the Civil Code of the Russian

Federation (provisions on the provision of paid

services), ch. 49 of the Civil Code of the Russian

Federation (provisions on instructions) or ch. 52 of

the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (provisions

on agenting), according to which the necessary

actions to build a reputation will be carried out on

behalf of the competent government bodies for a fee.

The above will fully comply with the current

legislation, and the limits of the state's right to use its

reputation will be the limits of the exercise of civil

rights, provided for in Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the

Russian Federation, within which the Russian

Federation should not act in bad faith, with the aim of

causing damage to any other persons, as well as with

the aim of confusing the latter, disseminating untrue

damaging information about itself.

Also, actions within the Russian Federation's use

of its reputation can be monitoring of the information

field by an authorized competent body for possible

violations of reputation and the right to reputation. It

seems necessary, that each government body or state

body, within the competence, determined by the

relevant acts, take actions to identify the facts of

violation of the state's reputation in the media or on

the Internet in order to further protect the state's

reputation.

Characterizing the authority to one's own actions,

which is included in the subjective right of the state

to reputation, it is possible to say, that the emerging

legal relations have both an absolute and a relative

nature (Flejshic, E.A. (1939). So, directly informing

other persons about the country, about its activity,

about its role in this or that event, about the

significance of this or that fact for the purposes of a

correct understanding of the course of events, the

relevant competent government body enters into an

absolute legal relation with an undefined number

participants on the other side in a given social

relation. In this part, the subjective right of the

Russian Federation to reputation, the foundation of

which is the very existence of the state and its

reputation, correspond to the obligations of an

indefinite circle of subjects not to interfere with the

exercise of this right and not to take actions, that

violate this right. At the same time, for example, by

concluding an agency agreement with a commercial

firm, the subject of which is the formation of a

positive reputation in the opinion of entourage, the

competent government body enters into a relative

legal relation with such a firm, the participants of

which are known, and, in this case, the right of the

state to reputation corresponds to the obligations of

the counterparty under the contract, which consist in

performing actions to form (improve) the reputation

of the state.

The second authority, structurally included in the

non-property right of Russia to a reputation, is the

ability to demand from other (obligated) persons such

behavior, in which the state will be able to freely

satisfy existing needs at the expense of its own

benefit, to prevent the dissemination of untrue

Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation

109

damaging information in any form, and require any

subjects of the right to refrain from any actions, that

violate the reputation and the existing right of the

state to reputation. It seems, that this authority of the

state, regarding reputation, is based on the

intersectoral duty of all subjects, which consists in

refraining from encroachments on material or

intangible benefits, belonging to others, since “there

are no such rights, that would not be potentially

warranted by law and order against possible illegal

actions of any persons" (Sinicyn, S.A., 2015). In this

case, the personal non-property right of the state to

reputation will have an absolute nature, since the

circle of obliged subjects is not defined, and the

content of the obligation, that secure it, is the same for

all other persons. Due to the fact, that everyone

around is obliged to refrain from violating the

reputation and the personal non-property right of the

Russian Federation to reputation, the autonomy of its

will is ensured.

At the same time, in the event of an violation, a

protective personal non-property legal relation will

arise that exists against the background of a general

regulatory relation (Luspenik, D.D., 2003), which

will acquire a relative nature, since the circle of

subjects will be known and will be narrowed down to

one or several persons, who have disseminated

damaging information. It should be noted, that a legal

relation of an absolute nature will remain

with respect

to the rest of the subjects. An interesting characteristic

of legal relations, similar to the second authorities,

included into the subjective right of the Russian

Federation to the reputation, was given by V.K.

Reicher, who noted that “communication between

people in a legal relations is established either by the

type of direct lines, located between any points in

space, or by the type of radio communication, which

connects a specific point in space with an absolutely

indefinite number of other points. In the first case

(relative legal relations), legal energy spreads only

through this line, although at the same time it

disperses in the surrounding space, performing the

reflected action at third parties. In the second case

(absolute legal relations), law radiates energy from

one point in a wave-like manner to all sides of the

social environment” (Rajher, V.K., 1928).

The most important is to recognize the nature of

the third authority of the Russian Federation - to

protect its subjective civil right to reputation, since by

its nature, any “subjective right granted to a person,

but not secured against its violation by the necessary

means of protection, is only a declarative right.

Although it is declared in the law, but, not being

provided with state law enforcement, it can only be

reckoned on voluntary respect for it by members of

society and a this nature of only a morally secured

right, based on the consciousness of members of

society and the authority of state power, gains force”

(Gribanov, V.P., 1992).

The general theoretical opportunity of any subject

to protect the rights belonging to this subject is

enshrined in ch. 2 of the Civil Code of the Russian

Federation, which includes judicial and extrajudicial

methods of protecting civil rights. As stated in the

legal encyclopedia: "protection is a system of

measures applied to ensure the free and proper

exercise of subjective rights, including judicial

protection, legislative, economic, organizational,

technical and other means and measures, as well as

self-defense of civil rights" (Tihomirova, L.V. ,

Tihomirov, M.U., 1998).

In the legal literature, there are various points of

view, regarding the nature of the right to protect.

Some scientists define it as part of the authorities of

subjective civil law (Gribanov, V.P., 2000), others

recognize the independent status of this right,

discovering in its composition the authorities,

corresponding to the nature of the individual right (for

the subject's own active actions, requirements for

certain behavior from obligated persons and force of

the state in case of violation of the law) (Vlasova,

A.V., 1998). In this regard, we can agree with N.I.

Matuzov, who includes the right to protect in the

subjective civil law, but, at the same time, notes, that

“no serious mistake will be made if this opportunity

is noted separately. First, this emphasizes one of the

most important specifics of the subjective rights of

citizens - their legal security; secondly, this is one of

the types of possible actions, behaviors of the owner

of the subjective right” (Matuzov, N.I., 1966).

With regard to a situation, in which untrue

damaging information is being disseminated against

the Russian Federation, it can be stated, that the state

has the right to protect its reputation in view of the

encroachment on it, which should be structurally

considered as part of the state's more general right to

reputation. It can even be said, that the protection of

the right is a special stage in the development of the

protected subjective right of the state to reputation,

since it, like any other subjective right, can either pass

into the stage of protection from the arised violations,

and not pass, if the state will not exercise the authority

to protect an existing right.

Provided, that Russia takes advantage of the

opportunity to exercise the above authorities, a

protective, potentially delictual, legal relation is

formed, the basis of which is the existence of the fact,

that the assumed infringer has committed an action to

WFLAW 2021 - INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM ON JURISPRUDENCE

110

disseminate discrediting and untrue (at the conclusion

of the competent government bodies) information. It

should be noted, that it will become a tort legal

relation only if the fact of defamation is established in

a judicial or extrajudicial procedure, and the

elements

of the delict will also be the ratio of common

information to the injured subject and the cause and

effect relationship between the committed action and

possible damage, which can be inflicted on the

reputation of the state as a result of the deterioration

of the level of its general social assessment. The

presence of the infringer guilt in committing a delict,

in contrast to the criminal offense in the form of libel,

is not mandatory, and thus, the imposition of

responsibility for the offense is quite possible even in

the absence of the infringer guilt (cl. 2 of article 1064

of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The authority of the Russian Federation to protect

its reputation is the ability of the authorised person to

use the law enforcement, provided for in Art. 12 and

152 (by analogy with the methods of protecting

honor, dignity and business reputation) of the Civil

Code of the Russian Federation, and other acts in

order to restore the violated right, as well as suppress

actions, that violate it.

A specific feature of Russia's authority to protect

its right to reputation is the mixed nature of the

emerging legal relation. As a general rule, the parties

to the protective legal relation to protect the reputation

are known - the state, represented by the competent

government body and the obligated person, who

disseminated damaging information. In this case, a

relative legal relation arises. But, in the case, provided

for in cl. 8 of Art. 152 of the Civil Code of the Russian

Federation, when it is impossible to establish the

identity of a person, who disseminated the specified

information, the state does not lose the authority to

protect its reputation, and should also have, by

analogy with the law, the possibility of recognizing

the disseminated information as untrue information.

In this case, an absolute legal relation will arise,

where the state's demand will be addressed to an

indefinite circle of persons.

3 CONCLUSION

The research, carried out in this article, showed, that

the subjective right of the state to reputation really

exists in the social relations, that have developed in

modern conditions, is structurally included in the

legal competence of Russia as a subject of civil law,

and this right, due to its specifics, can be attributed to

personal non-property rights, which the Russian

Federation possesses, by virtue of cl. 1 of Art. 125 of

the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Describing

the state's right to reputation, it can be confirmed, that

its content consists of the possibility of its own

actions, suggesting, that the Russian Federation owns

and has a reputation, the possibility of demanding

from other persons to prevent the dissemination of

damaging information and refrain from any actions,

that violate the existing right, as well as the possibility

of protection of the violated right to reputation in the

event, that negative, untrue information is anyway

disseminated.

Also, we would like to say the following. Based

on the fact, that at present, there are repeated cases of

dissemination of untrue damaging information,

regarding the Russian Federation, it is reasonable to

use a set of measures for the practical application of

this research by analogy with measures to improve the

efficiency of the legal control mechanism, that are used

in the general theory of law (Hohlova, E.M., 2014):

amendments to the current civil legislation of

the Russian Federation, which implies the need for a

legislative definition of reputation as an independent

type of intangible benefit and securing the state's

personal non-property right to reputation, including

the authority to protect it. The legislative

confirmation of the Russian Federation's right to

reputation, and its protection, will serve as a basis for

subsequently determining specific ways to protect the

violated right, as well as, within the framework of

this, develop clear measures to be taken. If these

actions are not taken, then the Russian Federation will

remain, in fact, defenseless against defamation in

completely different fields of state activity, and will

suffer significant reputational damage;

In cl. 1 of Art. 150 of the Civil Code of the

Russian Federation, in the list of available intangible

benefits, it is required to include reputation as a

separate type of intangible benefits. It is also required

to introduce certain rules of law into the Civil Code

of the Russian Federation establishing the right of

such subjects to a reputation, such as the Russian

Federation, constituent entities of the Russian

Federation and municipalities (this could be done, for

example, by including cl. 4 of the relevant content in

Article 125 of the Civil Code) and the right of these

subjects to protect their reputation (by including

Article 152.1 in the Civil Code of the Russian

Federation).

development and application of a set of

measures, that complement the regulatory control,

which must be taken to protect the state's right to

reputation from numerous violations, as well as

aimed at forming (improving), creating an adequate

Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation

111

level of the state's reputation, using reputation in the

activity of the state. The optimal combination of

lawmaking and law enforcement will give flexibility

and universality to legal control.

In conclusion, it should be noted, that, of course,

the requirements for the volume of the article did not

allow the author to more fully disclose the research

topic, which undoubtedly needs to be described in

more detail many of the issues, raised in the article.

At the same time, the author will try to do this in the

future, in the following scientific works.

REFERENCES

Inshakova, A.O., Frolova, E.E., Rusakova, E.P., Galkina,

M.V. (2020). Development of social market economy

under the influence of noneconomic factors: modeling

and regulation. International Journal of Sociology and

Social Policy. T. 40. pages 1.

Mémoires d'outre-tombe par Chateaubriand. Volume

4. Dufour. Mulat et Boulanger. 1860: 237 Telnov, A.V.

(2021). The Russian Federation as a

subject of defamatory civil law relations during the

formation of the digital economy. SHS Web of

Conferences 106: 02002.

Tolstoj, V.S. (2009). Lichnye neimushchestvennye

pravootnosheniya. pages 202.

Inshakova, A.O., Frolova, E.E., Rusakova, E.P., Kovalev,

S.I. The model of distribution of human and machine

labor at intellectual production in industry 4.0. Journal

of Intellectual Capital. T. 21, 4. pages 601-622.

Gusalova, A.R. (2012). Grazhdansko-pravovaya zashchita

delovoj reputacii: diss. k.yu.n. Vladikavkaz. pages 30.

Sahapov, U.Z. (2007). Delovaya reputaciya sub"ektov

predprinimatel'skoj deyatel'nosti v sisteme ob"ektov

grazhdanskih prav i osobennosti ee grazhdansko-

pravovoj zashchity: diss., k.yu.n. Kazan'.pages 49.

Maleina, M.N. (2013). Pravo gosudarstva (publichnogo

obrazovaniya) na reputaciyu. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 5.

pages 101

Kuznecov, N.M., (2009). Soderzhanie otnoshenij po

zashchite chesti, dostoinstva i delovoj reputacii. diss.

k.yu.n. pages 31.

Rogov, D.I. (2003). Mekhanizm grazhdansko- pravovogo

regulirovaniya otnoshenij, voznikayushchih po povodu

chesti, dostoinstva i dobrogo imeni grazhdan: diss.

k.yu.n. Ekaterinburg. pages. 78.

Rusakova, E.P., Frolova, E.E., Gorbacheva, A.I. (2020).

Digital rights as a new object of civil rights: issues of

substantive and procedural law. Advances in Intelligent

Systems and Computing . T. 1100. psges 665-671.

Blyumkin, V.A. (1974). O chesti i dostoinstve sovetskogo

cheloveka. pages 27.

Bratus, S.N. (1947). Yuridicheskie lica v sovetskom

grazhdanskom prave. pages 31-34.

Malein, N.S. (1981). Grazhdanskij zakon i prava lichnosti v

SSSR. pages 94

Tolstoj, U.K. (1059). K teorii pravootnosheniya.

pages 45-46.

Alekseev, S.S. (1999). Pravo. Azbuka. Teoriya. Filosofiya:

Opyt kompleksnogo issledovaniya. pages 68.

Matuzov, N.I. (1966). Subektivnye prava grazhdan. pages

Eroshenko, A.A. (1977). Sudebnaya zashchita

ohranyaemogo zakonom interesa. Sovetskaya yusticiya,

13. pages 19.

Malein, N.S. (1985). Pravonarushenie: ponyatie, prichiny,

otvetstvennost'. pages 62-63.

Nohrina, M.L. (2004). Grazhdansko-pravovoe

regulirovanie lichnyh neimushchestvennyh otnoshenij,

ne svyazannyh s imushchestvennymi. pages 29.

Nohrina, M.L. (2004). Grazhdansko-pravovoe

regulirovanie lichnyh neimushchestvennyh otnoshenij,

ne svyazannyh s imushchestvennymi. pages 182

Senchishchev, V.I. (1988). Obekt grazhdanskogo

pravootnosheniya. Aktual'nye voprosy grazhdanskogo

prava. pages 139-140.

Miroshnichenko, O.I., Samusenko, T.M., Gaivoronskaya,

Ya.V., Frolova, E.E. (2018). Doctrine in the modern

world: legal traditions and modern potential. The social

sciences (Pakistan). The social sciences (Pakistan). T.

13. № 2. pages 235-240.

Timerhanov, A.A. (2013). Delovaya reputaciya

yuridicheskogo lica: diss. k.yu.n.. pages 81.

Malein, N.S. Mozolin, V.P. (1986). Razvitie sovetskogo

grazhdanskogo prava na sovremennom etape. pages

205-206.

Teoriya gosudarstva i prava: Uchebnik dlya vuzov.

Zakon i pravo. (2004). pages 187.

Aleksandrov, N.G. (1955). Zakonnost' i

pravootnosheniya v

sovetskom obshchestve.

pages

108;

Yavich, S.L. (1976). Obshchaya teoriya prava.

pages177;

Tarhov, V.A. (1998). Grazhdanskoe pravo. pages 115.

Matuzov, N.I. (1972). Lichnost'. Prava. Demokratiya.

Teoreticheskie problemy subektivnogo prava. pages

115-124.

Alekseev, S.S. (1972). Problemy teorii prava. T. 1. pages

308;

Gribanov, V.P. (2001). Osushchestvlenie i zashchita

grazhdanskih prav.

Belyavskij, A.V., Pridvorov, N.A. (1971). Ohrana chesti i

dostoinstva lichnosti v SSSR. pages 33.

D'yachenko, E.M. (2005). Delovaya reputaciya

yuridicheskih lic: diss. k.yu.n.. pages127-128.

Hohlova, E.M. (2014). Sub"ektivnoe pravo i

yuridicheskaya obyazannost' v mekhanizme pravovogo

regulirovaniya. pages 45.

Flejshic, E.A. (1939). Lichnye prava v grazhdanskom prave

SSSR i kapitalisticheskih stran: diss. d.yu.n..

Halfina, R.O. (1974). Obshchee uchenie o pravootnoshenii.

In-t gosudarstva i prava AN SSSR.

Ioffe, O.S. (2000). Spornye voprosy ucheniya o

pravootnoshenii. Sbornik izbrannyh trudov po

grazhdanskomu pravu.

Sinicyn, S.A. (2015). Absolyutnye i otnositel'nye

sub"ektivnye prava. Obshchee uchenie i problemy teorii

WFLAW 2021 - INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FORUM ON JURISPRUDENCE

112

grazhdanskogo prava. Sravnitel'no- pravovoe

issledovanie: monografiya. pages 46

Grazhdanskoe pravo: aktual'nye problemy teorii i praktiki.

(2008). pages 628.

Nikulicheva, N.U. (2004)., Pravo yuridicheskih lic na

delovuyu reputaciyu i ee grazhdansko-pravovaya

zashchita: diss. k.yu.n.. psges 71.

Malinovskij, D.A. (2002). Aktual'nye problemy kategorii

sub"ektivnogo veshchnogo prava: diss. k.yu.n. pages

133-136.

Luspenik, D.D. (2003). Sudoproizvodstvo po delam o

zashchite chesti, dostoinstva i delovoj reputacii: diss.

k.yu.n.. pages 26.

Rajher, V.K. (1928). Absolyutnye i otnositel'nye prava.

Izvestiya ekonomicheskogo fakul'teta Leningradskogo

politekhnicheskogo instituta, I (XXVIII). pages 304

Gribanov, V.P. (1992). Predely osushchestvleniya i

zashchity grazhdanskih prav. pages 96.

Tihomirova, L.V., Tihomirov, M.U. (1998) Yuridicheskaya

enciklopediya. pages 169.

Gribanov, V.P. (2000). Osushchestvlenie i zashchita

grazhdanskih prav. pages 104.

Anisimov, A.L. (2001). Grazhdansko-pravovaya zashchita

chesti, dostoinstva i delovoj reputacii po

zakonodatel'stvu Rossijskoj Federacii. pages 44.

Vlasova, A.V. (1998). Struktura subektivnogo

grazhdanskogo prava. pages 26.

Krashenninikov, E.A. (1986). K voprosu o strukture

subektivnogo prava. Aktual'nye filosofskie problemy

sovremennoj nauki i tekhniki. pages 27- 28.

Matuzov, N.I. (1966). Sub"ektivnye prava grazhdan. pages

33.

Hohlova, E.M. (2014). Sub"ektivnoe pravo i

yuridicheskaya obyazannost' v mekhanizme pravovogo

regulirovaniya: monografiya. pages 70.

The civil code of the Russian Federation. [Electronic

resource]. – URL:

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/acc_e/rus_e/wt

ac.. (date of treatment: 01.05.2021).

Personal Non-property Right of the Russian Federation, as a Subject of Civil Law Relations, to Reputation

113