Legality and Human Rights: Administrative Justice in Russia 1862-1917

The question of how far pre-revolutionary Russia was from the ideal of a lawful state has received little academic attention, particularly as relates to the legal regulation of relations between person, society and state within the state administration. Pravilova explored the methods of settling disputes between individuals and the administration, and the emergence of legal controls of the administration, analysed projects for the organisation of administrative justice and studied the particular nature of concepts from Russian administrative justice. The idea of an organisation of special bodies examining complaints by private persons against the actions of officials and state bureaucratic organs first appeared in the early 1860s. In the 1870s-1890s various projects for the reform of administrative justice (reorganisation of the Senate and local administrative institutions) were proposed by the Ministries of Justice and Finance, but none of these was put into practice, largely due to resistance from the bureaucracy. At the same time, however, the rapid development of private enterprise, the activities of the zemstvo and self-government produced new norms and mechanisms for the regulation of authorities and social relations. Despite the lack of institutional conditions, the Senate did consider complaints from private persons against illegal actions by administrative officials, playing a role similar to that of the supreme administrative courts in France and Germany. The spread of concepts of a 'lawful state' aroused support for a system of administrative justice and the establishment of administrative tribunals was seen as a condition of legality and a guarantee of human rights. The government was forced to understand that measures to maintain legality were vital to preserve the stability of the system of state power, but plans for liberal reforms were pushed into the background by constitutional reforms. The idea of guarantees of human rights in relations with the authorities was in contradiction with the idea of the monarchy and it was only when the Provisional Government took power in 1917 that the liberal programme of legal reforms had any chance of being put into practice. A law passed in June 1917 ordained the organisation of local administrative justice bodies, but its implementation was hampered by the war, the shortage of qualified judges and the existing absolute legal illiteracy, and the few administrative courts that were set up were soon abolished by the new Soviet authorities. Pravilova concluded that the establishment of a lawful state in pre-revolutionary Russia was prevented by a number of factors, particularly the autocratic nature of the supreme authority, which was incompatible with the idea of administrative justice as a guarantee of the rights of citizens in their relations with the state.

Child Aggression in a Post-Communist Country: Race and Gender Aspects in a Cross-Cultural Comparison

Gypsies represent approximately 2.5% of the Czech population, but are considerably over-represented among the unemployed, prisoners, schooldropouts, neglected children, etc. Together with racist attitudes on the part of the majority, this causes strong inter-ethnic tension and obviouseconomic, moral and political problems. This research studied the way in which this situation is reflected in peer relations between Gypsy andmajority children in schools. Six samples of children (totalling 2974 children aged 7-15, of whom 15% were Gypsies) were studied through peernomination, teacher assessment and self-reporting. Gypsy/non-Gypsy and gender dichotomies were correlated with measures of aggression,victimisation and acceptance/rejection. The results showed that Gypsy children, both boys and girls, were more likely to nominate their Gypsy peers as aggressors than they nominatemajority children, implying that they tend to direct their rejection toward their own kind. The number of Gypsy children in a class was also animportant factor with Gypsies being more likely to be accepted and less likely to appear aggressive when they were only one or two in a class, thanin a class where there was a greater number of Gypsy pupils. When whole classes were taken as the unit of analysis, Gypsy children were seen asmore likely to behave aggressively in class by their Gypsy and non-Gypsy counterparts as well as by their teachers. At the same time they aremuch less likely to become victims of aggression than are non-Gypsy children, both boys and girls. Mr. Rican also found that the acceptance/rejection patterns of Gypsy children betray their unsatisfactory socialisation. Among their peers, Gypsyor non-Gypsy, they tend to prefer aggressors or children who teachers describe as showing little discipline or effort to succeed at school. Partialcorrelation to assess the influence of seniority on aggressiveness provided a warning that the recent lengthening of compulsory school attendance islikely to bring an increase in aggressiveness. He believes that Gypsy ethnic identity has lost many of its important positive aspects, making itsnegative aspects more prominent and more dangerous. He does however find some possible ways for teachers to reinforce the positive aspects ofGypsy children's identities in order to support their socialisation at schools.