Annotation

he article explores the phenomenon of “non-application” of a constitutional norm as an independent form of constitutional enforcement. The author proceeds from the premise that the traditional understanding of enforcement as an active authoritative activity aimed at implementing legal norms does not cover the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation concerning the refusal to apply certain constitutional provisions in order to protect higher constitutional values. Using the example of the implementation of Article 20 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which enshrines the right to life (Part 1) and allows for the establishment of the death penalty (Part 2), the author demonstrates how the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation formulated a legal position that effectively precluded the application of Part 2 of this article. “Non-application” is defined as a form of constitutional enforcement carried out by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, whereby a norm, while formally remaining in the text of the Constitution, is not actually applied as a result of value-oriented interpretation that resolves the conflict between the literal meaning of the norm and a higher constitutional value. The article substantiates that “non-application” is not inaction, a gap in the law, or a violation; rather, it represents a conscious, reasoned decision that has a procedural character and is binding on all law enforcers. The author concludes that “non-application” should be included in the typology of forms of constitutional enforcement as a special, extreme form of interpretative enforcement.