Reforms of the mid-16th century. State reforms in Russia in the mid-16th century. The result of military reform in the mid-16th century.

At the end of the 40s, a circle of advisers formed around the young tsar, which later received the name “Chosen Rada”. The Chosen Council included people of different origins and social status. There were people of “breed” here, representatives of aristocratic families, such as Prince Andrei Kurbsky; there were people from the provincial nobility who were elevated to the top by royal favor. These included one of the most prominent figures of the Chosen Rada, the Kostroma landowner Alexei Adashev, who, according to the arrogant remark of Ivan the Terrible, was taken to the court “from the rot.” The priest Sylvester was close to the Rada and had a strong moral influence on the Tsar. Sylvester belonged to the nature of deeply, fanatically religious people. He even had prophetic “visions” and “heavenly voices”, stories about which shocked the impressionable Ivan. And although at the royal court there was a lot of slander against the newly-minted prophet, the king was afraid to disobey the Archpriest of the Annunciation, and the Archpriest himself, apparently, sincerely believed in his mission to teach and instruct his crowned spiritual son in the “divine truth.” Later Ivan IV will accuse the “damned priest” of intimidating him and keeping him in fear. It is difficult to verify the truth of these accusations. Sylvester undoubtedly restrained Ivan's "violent temper" IV, reminding us of responsibility for sins committed, the obligation to live in the fear of God. Such relationships between pastors and flock, priest and his spiritual children were the norm.

But what, in this case, united people so different in status and character? Why did they become involved in the Chosen Rada? What they had in common was an awareness of the need for reforms and a willingness to implement them. And, finally, participation in their implementation. Therefore, determining the role and significance of the Elected Rada in political history XVI century, it is necessary to say with certain reservations that the Rada became an unofficial ideological and organizational center of reforms, an association of like-minded people, strong in their proximity and influence on Ivan IV. The main idea that united the members of the Elected Rada was the recognition of the need for strong power based on the nobility.

The reforms that the Elected Rada began concerned, first of all, management and the implementation of the internal functions of the state, and, therefore, there were shortcomings and a need for change.

In 1550, a new Code of Law was adopted. Its characteristic feature was the desire to improve the administration of justice. True, the old system of administration and court in the person of governors and volosts was preserved. But with significant amendments, the essence of which was to strengthen control over them on the part of the local population and the central authorities, for this purpose, headmen and kissers, representatives of the nobility, posad and black-sown people (i.e. free people who paid taxes to the state) had to participate in the court of governors ) peasants: “You can’t judge a court without elders and kissers.” Control on the part of the central administration was expressed in the fact that a number of cases had to be coordinated and approved in Moscow: “without reporting” to the sovereign, the governor had no right to punish or pardon “the thief and the murderer and any dashing person.” The activities of the governors were to be closely monitored by the clerks, representatives of the emerging bureaucracy.

The basis for the arbitrariness of governors and volosts, which could arise due to the lack of national legislation, with the advent of the Code of Law, if not disappeared, then it was greatly narrowed. Uniform and generally known amounts of viceroyal court fees were established. The local population now had income lists with a calculation of the range of judicial and financial prerogatives of the governors. Bribery and red tape received legal condemnation. Bribery was punishable by a fine.

Finally, for the first time on a national scale, the so-called lip reform was carried out, establishing local self-government. His competence was quite modest: a number of criminal cases, the search for “slave robbers”, in whose capture the population was especially interested. But this area of ​​activity was also removed from the jurisdiction of the governors.

It is noteworthy that very soon the articles about the court of governors and volosts lost their force. In the mid-50s, the Elected Rada completely abolished the administration of governors and transferred it into the hands of “favorite judges” or “heads” elected by the population, “who would be kind and straightforward and loved by all peasants (Christians). The same cases that the elected judges “cannot finish” were ordered to be sent to Moscow. Instead of viceroyal “feeds” and duties, which previously went to support governors and volosts, a quitrent (“feeding payback”) was established, which went to the royal treasury for the salaries of military men and for other needs.

Thus, the vicegerental management system, which developed during the period of liquidation of appanages and came into strong conflict with the requirements of the time, was first limited and then, due to its fundamental unsuitability, abolished.

The significance of the Code of Laws of 1550 is enormous. Despite the fate of its individual articles, this was valid legislation on a national scale. Relying on it, the service bureaucracy, without which the construction of a centralized state is unthinkable, expanded its functions. The new set of laws accelerated the formation of the order system. The centralized state found a legal basis in the Code of Laws; having received it, he moved more confidently in the chosen direction. One cannot help but see the social orientation of Sudebnik. We received confirmation and development of the norm of the still preserved peasant exit on St. George’s Day. At the same time, the power of the landowner and patrimonial owner over the peasant increased: firstly, responsibility was assigned for many peasant crimes; The feudal lord in the Code of Laws was called by analogy with the right of serfs - the “sovereign” of the peasant. This is a significant fact, testifying to the convergence in the legal consciousness of legislators of the legal status of the powerless serf with the peasant. Such norms “predicted” the future of the Russian peasantry, its transformation into serfdom.

The history of the creation and establishment of orders - central executive bodies, unique departments for sectors of the economy, regions of the country and state affairs - is closely connected with the Elected Rada. The most important orders were those of the Posolsky, who was in charge of foreign policy; local order, which dealt with land ownership of service people; rank-and-file, whose competence included military service duties - the organization of the army, the appointment of governors. The petition order, which was under the jurisdiction of Alexei Adashev, acquired important significance. All complaints about “unrighteousness,” “violence,” etc. flocked here. Those caught in lawlessness and abuse were overtaken by the sovereign's disgrace - "sorrow." Thus, the Petition Order turned into a kind of control body overseeing the administration.

By the end of the 50s, a unified order system arose, built on the sectoral principle. Acting throughout the entire territory of the state, each order was primarily in charge of an area that was important for the executive branch: foreign policy, military affairs, etc., which naturally led to more significant results. But improving the activities of government bodies is only one side of the reforms. Another, no less important, was that the old territorial management system, which grew up in the process of political unification of lands, was supplemented by a sectoral management system that was more consistent with the needs of centralization. This was a qualitative shift. The state, with ramifying central government bodies and obsolete orderly businessmen, was turning into a more effective instrument of autocratic power. The increase in the number of officials increased bribery, which they tried to combat with the provisions of the Code of Law of 1550.

In 1556, along with the abolition of feedings - the institution of governorship - an important Code of Service was adopted. His clear articles streamlined the service and created interest among landowners. The number of military servants going on campaign with the landowner was strictly dependent on the size of the estate. Deviation from the number in the direction of decrease was punished; exceeding it was encouraged with monetary assistance and land grants.

Measures to reorganize the service, designed to strengthen the armed forces, were supplemented by streamlining the viceroyalty system. Having emerged at the turn XV- XVI centuries, localism was intended to regulate relations within the aristocratic, ruling part of the ruling class. This was a unique form of coexistence of the aristocracy, protecting it, on the one hand, from the arbitrariness of the Moscow “Grand Duke, Sovereign,” and on the other, encouraging the nobility to serve this power. The first was achieved by the fact that the highest court and government positions were in the hands of aristocratic families, “people of breed”; appointment to them was connected not only with the will of the king, but also depended on origin (a factor independent of the sovereign), “fatherly honor.” In turn, “fatherly honor” was composed of previous official appointments, the merits of the family and future appointments. Thus, the grand ducal, royal power received an instrument of influence on the aristocracy through a system of official appointments.

The institution of vicegerency organized and introduced into a certain framework the relations within the aristocracy, between the aristocracy and the authorities. However, this organization was far from ideal. Local disputes constantly arose between the clans and their representatives. Those who considered this or that appointment to be a derogation of their “fatherland” refused the post, “dragged their feet,” disobeyed, etc. The consequences were not encouraging. Appointments to regiments were often made not on the basis of suitability or talent, but on parochial compatibility. However, this rarely helped. “Whoever you appoint, everyone immediately takes over,” Ivan complained. IV. Localism had a negative impact in everything, but most of all in military affairs, turning into failures and lost battles.

The elected Rada tried to streamline parochial relations and even regulate them in the most vulnerable area - in the military. The latter, in particular, was expressed in the fact that it was strictly forbidden to be parochial during hostilities.

The limitation of localism, as well as another government measure - the organization of a permanent streltsy army, increased the combat effectiveness of the Russian army. On the other hand, changes in such a purely “aristocratic sphere” as localism testified to the determination of the Chosen One to affect even the interests of the titled and untitled nobility for the sake of strengthening the state. Government financial policy also developed in the same direction. Initially, the Elected Rada hoped to replenish the royal treasury and at the same time satisfy the landowners' demands for new land distributions at the expense of church estates. These plans provoked fierce resistance from the clergy. Metropolitan Macarius, who had great influence on the king, openly made it clear that the church would oppose any attempts by the servants of the “king of the earth” to encroach on the property of the servants of the “king of heaven.”

The autocratic government needed the support of spiritual power too much to allow a dubious aggravation of relations. The Rada was forced to retreat. But this was a retreat-compromise: the verdict of 1551 put a limit on the limitless growth of monastic estates: monasteries were deprived of the right to buy new lands or receive them as deposits without the permission of the tsar. This was an attempt to stop the seizure of secular lands “from service” - after all, landowners and patrimonial owners went to war precisely from these lands.

However, such a solution to the issue of monastic land ownership in no way resolved the financial problem. Meanwhile, transformations in the state and military areas have acutely raised the issue of replenishing the budget. The elected Rada decided to partially abolish the “Tarkhans” - various financial and judicial privileges of large secular and spiritual landowners. There was also another social layer in this financial action of the government: the developed system of “Tarkhans” was characteristic of the appanage era. Consequently, it was a measure that reflected the needs of centralization, the need to equalize estates and classes before the feudal state law.

Among the financial measures of the Elected Rada was tax reform. The increase in state taxes was combined with an attempt to more flexibly take into account the material capabilities of the draft population.

A unified taxation system was introduced. A unit was taken to be a “plow” (a plot of land approximately 400-600 hectares), from which a “tax” (a set of in-kind and monetary duties) was levied. What was taken into account, first of all, was plowed, “fat” land that generated income. The government did not want the ruin of the tax collectors - it was no coincidence that this was blamed on the boyar rulers. But it did not want anyone to be “in ease”, to avoid taxation. The new taxation system had a clearly social character. The black-growing peasants, dependent on the state, paid the most. They were subject to additional duties: construction, transportation, etc. Then came the farmers living on the lands of the church and monasteries. Landowner peasants paid the least. This ease, however, was explained by the need to support the landowner, pay him rent, and produce a “product” - corvée.

Reforms also took place in the church. At the turn of the 40-50s, the pantheon of saints was replenished twice. This time preference was given to Russian miracle workers, their venerable saints, who received the status of all-Russian ones. The subtext of this action is obvious: Rus' is rich in its ascetics, and it shows them to the entire Orthodox world, thereby claiming a leading place - the place of the true center of Eastern Christianity. This was a direct response to the political doctrine about the special role of the Russian Orthodox state, which was spreading in society and required additional ideological and religious justification. A single pantheon of Russian saints of a single Russian state was approved in 1551 at the so-called Stoglav Council (the collection of its decisions had 100 paragraphs - chapters, “Stoglav”). At the same time, church rituals were unified and worship was streamlined, which strengthened church governance. The Stoglavy Council paid a lot of attention to the moral character of the clergy, so that the priests “would not fight and bark and would not swear and would not enter the church and drink into the holy altar.” This was not about a decline in the moral level or piety of the clergy - although life provided plenty of such examples. Under the conditions of a centralizing state, the role of the church increased, within the framework of which the spiritual existence of society predominantly took place. New demands caused changes within the church organization and prompted a stricter approach to the moral character of pastors - that power that was directly addressed to believers.

Beginning of the reign of Ivan IV.

Further enslavement of the peasantry took place, and in the most severe forms (corvee labor).

So, the ruin and terror of the oprichnina years (1565-1572) became one of the main reasons for the deep crisis that Russia experienced at the end of the 16th century. Increasing social instability in the conditions of a dynastic crisis - the absence of a direct heir - led the Russian state to the tragic events of the Time of Troubles: the emergence of impostors claiming the throne, the invasion of foreign troops, the complete impoverishment of the people, the decline of the economy, and the degradation of the state.

Assessment by historians.

Different historians evaluate this phenomenon in Russian history as the oprichnina differently. Some talked about its necessity and benefits for the country, while others, on the contrary, condemned it. So Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov argued that “oprichnina meant the victory of the state principle over the tribal principle,” and since it was a necessity, it turns out that he justifies the actions of Ivan the Terrible. Historians of the 30s and 40s of the 20th century shared a similar point of view. They argued that “the oprichnina was aimed at layers of boyar land ownership, the people supported the tsar, and therefore terror arose.” On the other hand, historians such as Karamzin, Klyuchevsky, Skrynnikov and a number of other historians say that the tsar acted in this way out of fear of losing his power. But let's put some order in these opinions and understand them. Let's start with the reasons for the oprichnina.

Almost all historians are unanimous in their opinion that the main reasons for the oprichnina were:

Failures in the Livonian War (1564);

Successful raids of the Crimean Tatars;

Death of Queen Anastasia,

Fall of the Chosen Rada (1560);

Confiscation of lands and resettlement of the last prince Vladimir Staritsky,

Flight of Prince Kurbsky to Lithuania (1564)

Historians are also unanimous on the question of the goals of the oprichnina. The main goals of the oprichnina are:

Strengthening the autocratic power of the tsar;

Further enslavement of the peasantry;

Strengthening the country's defense capability,

Repressions against the feudal nobility

By “feudal nobility” most historians mean the boyars. It was not for nothing that Grozny allocated the “zemshchina” to the Boyar Duma. It was in the boyars that the tsar saw the reasons for his failures. He was confident in the need for strong autocratic power, the main obstacle to which was the boyar-princely opposition and boyar privileges. But not all historians think so. For example, Kobrin, on the contrary, argues that the boyars fought to strengthen the centralization of power.

He provides some evidence:

The idea that the boyars were a constant aristocratic opposition to the central government arose in our science largely under the influence of familiarity with the history of Western Europe, where proud and arbitrary barons resisted kings and even the emperor. In Rus', even during the period of feudal fragmentation, when a foreign enemy or from a neighboring principality approached, the boyar never took up the strengthening and defense of his estate. The Russian boyars did not defend each their own village, but together they defended the princely city and the entire principality as a whole.

The highest government institution was the Boyar Duma. All decrees and laws were formalized as “sentences” or “codes” of the Tsar and the Grand Duke and the boyars. All historians agree that the government policy embodied in these decrees was aimed at centralizing the country.

Large Russian feudal lords were not characterized by extensive latifundia; usually the boyar had estates in several counties simultaneously. The boundaries of the districts, as a rule, coincided with the old borders of the principalities. Therefore, a return to the times of appanage separatism really threatened the interests of the nobility.

Among the “new” servants of the king there were many scions of aristocratic families. Thus, we see that Kobrin provides well-founded evidence.

Also, many historians note that the oprichnina policy was not something uniform throughout its entire length and the centralization policy was carried out in extremely archaic forms, sometimes under the slogan of a return to antiquity. Confirming the autocratic power of the monarch as an immutable law of state life, Ivan the Terrible at the same time transferred all executive power in the zemshchina into the hands of the Boyar Duma and orders. Kobrin, in turn, claims that there was a different way of development of events. He believed that this path could be taken by the activities of the Elected Rada, under whose rule deep structural reforms aimed at achieving centralization were launched. This path was not only not as painful and bloody as the oprichnina, it also promised more lasting results. But this path did not promise immediate results, and even more so it excluded the formation of a despotic monarchy equipped with a roc-apparatus. The tsar did not agree with this, which is why he chose the oprichnina.

So what are the consequences of it? All historians, without exception, argue that the main goal of the oprichnina - the destruction of feudal fragmentation, undermining the basis of boyar-princely independence - was achieved, but, having eliminated political fragmentation, the oprichnina bled the country, demoralized the people, led to contradictions within the country, and weakened its military power. It caused the strengthening of feudal-serf oppression and was one of the factors that caused the further deepening of class contradictions and the development of class struggle in the country. Skrynnikov also emphasizes the fact that the oprichnina terror weakened the influence of the boyar aristocracy and also caused great damage to the nobility, the church, and the highest bureaucracy, that is, the forces that served as the strongest support for the monarchy. From a political point of view, fighting against these groups is complete nonsense.

So, the path of centralization through the oprichnina, along which Ivan the Terrible led the country, was disastrous and ruinous for the country. This must not be a coincidence. Immoral acts cannot lead to a progressive result. The history of the oprichnina once again clearly demonstrates the justice of this comforting truth.

State reforms of the mid-16th century.

In the middle of the 16th century. under Ivan IV, important reforms were carried out aimed at strengthening the centralized state. Among them, one of the first was an attempt reduce the omnipotence of the Boyar Duma(which included mainly representatives of the feudal aristocracy).

Centralization reforms:

In 1549, as part of the Duma, it was established "Elected Duma"

(“The Chosen Rada”) of the authorized representatives appointed by the king. It was an advisory body that, together with the tsar, decided on all the most important issues of government, temporarily pushing aside the Boyar Duma.

Contributed to centralization and oprichnina. The large “oprichnina” territory was governed by a special apparatus - the royal court, with oprichnina boyars, courtiers, etc. The power of the tsar was based on a special oprichnina corps, which performed the functions of the tsar’s personal guard, a body of political investigation and a direct punitive apparatus that fought not only against opponents of Ivan IV, but also with the masses of the people who opposed the strengthening of feudal oppression.

Local government reform: The previously existing feeding system was gradually abolished and replaced bodies of provincial and zemstvo self-government. Lip huts were created primarily as punitive authorities who were in charge of the fight against robbers, thieves, murderers, arsonists, and the search for fugitives. Later they were entrusted with some management functions. Thus, they were entrusted with collecting taxes, conducting a population census, and exercising control over taverns (drinking establishments) and taverns. Lip prefects announced administrative orders and were in charge of the provincial prison. In the 17th century the competence of the labial organs became even wider compared to the period of their creation and included all local government matters. The provincial letters were drawn up on behalf of the Sovereign of All Rus', contained a direct indication of this, and were approved with the appropriate signatures and seals.

Zemstvo reform: In the middle of the 16th century. Was held zemstvo reform, as a result of which were created zemstvo self-government bodies, chosen from among the townspeople and the wealthy strata of the black-sown peasantry. Their competence extended only to the townspeople and peasants. Boyars and nobles were removed from the jurisdiction of zemstvo bodies.

Reorganization of local government: At the beginning of the 17th century. significant local government reorganization. To many counties and cities government authorities were governors appointed. Voivodes were the authorities administrative and military(commanded armed detachments located in the territory under their jurisdiction), controlled the collection of taxes and the fulfillment of duties, were in charge of the courts and the police. Local government and city clerks were subordinate to them.

Military reform. Continued streamlining the organization of the noble militia. Was created standing streltsy army from people “by appointment” (i.e., for hire). At the beginning of the 17th century. another very important reform was undertaken in the organization of the armed forces - permanent regiments created.

Financial reform. In the 80-90s of the 16th century. the government carried out ubiquitous description of lands. Scribe books served as acts of serfdom of peasants to a certain landowner.

As direct taxes so-called Streltsy “food”, “fed farm-out”, “food”(for the purchase of weapons), "Polonyanichnye"(for the ransom of prisoners), yam money. In the 17th century The tsarist government introduced a number of additional direct and indirect taxes: so-called five, those. levying one-fifth of the value of movable property; customs, salt, tavern indirect taxes, trade duties, which were replaced in 1653 single trade duty in the amount of 5% of the product price. The taxes paid by the dependent population of the lands annexed to Russia were also increased.

Criminal law according to the Council Code of 1649

General definition There is no concept of crime in the law. But from the content of the articles of the Council Code one can conclude that the crime is understood violations of the royal will and law. By subjects of crime both individuals and groups of individuals vary.

Many new and important institutions of criminal law emerged. Thus, in the Council Code, crimes were distinguished intentional and careless. There was no punishment for random acts. The Institute also knew the code necessary defense. The cathedral code also knows the provision on emergency, exempting from criminal liability. Defined complicity, known incitement, complicity, concealment. Repeated or repeated commission of a crime was punished more harshly than the crime committed the first time. The Code made a distinction between attempted and completed crime. In the cathedral Code crimes are presented according to a certain system.

Crime system according to the cathedral code (by location in the code):
1) crimes against religion and church.(blasphemy, disruption of order in the church);
2) crimes against the state. (This refers to speaking against the king and even intent, punishable by death);
3) crimes against the order of government(falsification of seals, counterfeiting, violation of rules for collecting trade duties);
5) Crime against the judiciary(false oath, perjury);

6) Military crimes(treason by a serviceman, escape from the battlefield);

7) Crimes against morality(pandering, violation of family foundations)

8) Crimes against the person(murder, grievous bodily harm, insult by word and action)
6) Property crimes(theft, robbery, arson, fraud).

Punishment system.

Primary purpose of punishment: intimidation, retribution. Secondary purpose of punishment: isolation of the criminal from society.

Punishments according to the cathedral code:
1) the death penalty: qualified and simple. (Qualified: burning, metal poured into the throat, quartering, wheeling; burying alive in the ground; Simple execution: hanging)
2) self-harm: cutting off an arm, leg, tearing out an eye, nostril, etc. (2 purposes of this punishment: a) intimidation, b) to single out the criminal).
3) painful punishments: whipping a potogamere in a public place; imprisonment (from 3 days to 4 years or indefinitely).
4) deprivation of honor and rights.(Only applied to privileged layers).
5) property penalties. (The system of fines and the highest sanction is confiscation of the criminal’s property).
6) church punishments: repentance, excommunication, exile to a monastery.

7) imprisonment(from 3 days to unlimited);

9) hard labor.

The deanery charter of 1782 regulated the structure of police bodies, their system and main areas of activity, and the list of acts punishable by the police.

The body of the police department in the city became deanery council- a collegial body that included police chief, chief commandant or mayor, civil bailiffs And criminal cases, elected from citizens - Ratman-advisers.

The city was divided into parts And neighborhoods by number of buildings. In the unit the head of the police department was private bailiff, in the quarter - quarterly overseer. All police ranks fit into the Table of Ranks system.

Police leadership was entrusted to provincial authorities: the provincial government decided all issues regarding the appointment and removal of police positions, the Senate controlled the police department in the capitals.

The deanery charter listed a number of offenses and sanctions falling under the jurisdiction of police authorities.

Development of the Russian state system in the first half

XIX century + 24. Development of the Russian state system in the second half of the 19th century.

Alexander I

Secret Committee and Committee of Ministers:

In May 1801. the emperor was presented with a project to create a special

"secret committee" for the development and implementation of state

reforms. "Unspoken Committee" stopped its activities in the spring of 1802,

began to engage in preparation and implementation of reforms Mini-committee

strov. In contrast to collegiums, ministries had greater efficiency in management matters, the personal responsibility of managers and executors increased in them, and the significance and influence of offices and office work expanded. In 1802 it was formed eight ministries: military ground forces, naval forces, foreign affairs, justice, internal affairs, finance, commerce, public education.

Senate:

In June 1801, a number of decrees were sent to the Senate, which ordered the development of a system of rights and responsibilities of this body on an unshakable legislative basis, and an attempt was made to restore the Senate as the highest body of government power. The Senate was entrusted with putting the current legislation in order, for which a special commission was formed under it. The Senate was to become the supreme custodian of the laws.

The idea of ​​transforming the Senate into a legislative body was rejected by a "secret committee." The Senate was assigned the role of the highest judicial and supervisory body, directly subordinate to the emperor.

Emperor headed the entire system of power, relying on an extensive bureaucratic apparatus. Until 1801 it acted as the highest advisory body Council at the Highest Court, he was replaced Essential advice(in 1801), consisting of 12 members, which existed until 1810, when it was created as the highest legislative body developing bills (approved by the emperor). State Council.

State Council reviewed and prepared various legal

acts - laws, charters, institutions. The main goal of his legislative activity is to bring uniformity to the entire legal system.

Judicial reform:

In the first half of the 19th century. were the upper zemstvo court, the provincial magistrate and the upper reprisal were abolished.

Courts second instance steel in the provinces chambers of criminal and civil courts. The civil court chamber also performed the functions of a notary.

County Court was the first instance in minor criminal and civil cases all classes of the county, except for the city (citizens tried in town halls, magistrates, commercial and verbal courts).

Prosecutor's office locally was transferred to the jurisdiction Ministry of Justice.

In the volosts, populated state peasants, acted

estate courts - volost reprisals, whose police and judicial functions were regulated in detail by the statutes of 1839.

Since 1808 began to form commercial courts who considered bills of exchange, cases of commercial insolvency, etc.

Others acted departmental courts- military, maritime, mountain, forest, spiritual, communications, band peasant courts.

In capitals acted court courts for estates. Judicial

control carried out formed in 1802 Ministry of Justice

tition. The entire judicial system was built on class principles.

Nicholas I

Judicial reform of 1864

Prerequisites:

1) Before the reform the court in the empire was class-based;
2) There was no institution of protection;
3) Closed court hearings were practiced;
4) Judges were appointed by the administration;
5) Dominated "The Theory of Formal Proofs".

Principles of judicial reform (November 1864):
1) The court has become classless;
2) Procedural slavery of the parties;
3) Providing protection, jury participation;
4) Free evaluation of evidence, cancellation of the Theory of Formal Evidence, cancellation of the determination of remaining under suspicion;
5) The judicial process was separated from administrative intervention and judges became independent and irremovable;
6) Some judges were elected;
7) Glasnost, publicity;
8) Equality of all before the law;
9) Prosecutor supervision.

According to the reform of 1864, there arose two judicial systems: local courts, general courts. The judicial system is "a building that has neither foundation nor roof."

Local courts: volost courts, justices of the peace and congresses of justices of the peace.

General courts: district courts (established for several counties), judicial chambers for civil and criminal cases, and constitutional departments of the Senate for civil and criminal cases.
Justices of the peace consisted of counties and cities, a county with cities - it was a world district. It was divided into magistrate sections, each with its own local magistrate judge. These judges were elected.

Requirements for judges: 1) at least 25 years of age; 2) availability of special legal education or work experience; 3) a certain property qualification 4) elected for 3 years at district zemstvo assemblies.
Justices of the Peace cases of lesser crimes and misdemeanors. Punishments: arrest for up to 3 months, monetary penalties, where capital punishment did not exceed 300 rubles, monetary matters that could end in reconciliation of the parties.

All other cases are heard by the district court.
District courts were established for several counties and consisted of a chairman and members. Jury trials operate at the district court level(continental model). Jurors were elected from representatives of all classes.

Juror Requirements:
1) Russian citizenship;
2) Age from 25 to 70 years;
3) The residency requirement is at least 2 years.
Couldn't serve on a jury, as a rule, professional lawyers, military officers, police officials and persons who held high administrative positions. The jury considered cases of crimes and misdemeanors that entailed penalties associated with the deprivation of all rights of the estate, as well as all or some special rights and benefits.
Thus, in the autocratic monarchy a power emerged that was largely independent of it.

Zemstvo reform of 1864

Began on January 1, 1864. Elected local government bodies are being created. This means that the reform had bourgeois character. The bodies were involved in education, healthcare, road construction, fire insurance, and pest control. Zemstvos were created at two levels: counties and provinces. The zemstvo reform was based on curial system. Curia is a special category of voters; they are divided into groups according to certain criteria. Three curiae: 1) county landowners - landowners; 2) urban; 3) rural. There are remnants of class, but basically all segments of the population are allowed to vote.

Elections: each curia meets and elects vowels for 3 years at the district, zemstvo assembly. This is an administrative body. This meeting in its turn elects executive bodies: district, zemstvo councils headed by chairmen. The chairman is approved by the governor, so the zemstvo depends on the administration.

Provincial zemstvo institutions. Once every 3 years, members of district zemstvo assemblies elect councilors, and the assemblies, in turn, elect provincial zemstvo councils, an executive body headed by a chairman. The Chairman is approved by the Minister of Internal Affairs.

Urban reform of 1870

1870 - according to the zemstvo model, it was carried out urban reform. The model for reform was found in Prussia. Are being created unclassified city government bodies, That's why bourgeois reform. These bodies are elected once every four years based on property qualifications.

In addition to property qualifications, requirements: over 25 years old, Russian citizens. Every 4 years, city electoral assemblies were formed. These meetings elected members of the City Duma. There were three assemblies, and each elected one third of all the councilors. Only those who paid city taxes (entrepreneurs, householders...) participated in the meetings. 1st meeting: the largest taxpayers included, they paid one third of the total city tax; 2nd meeting: smaller taxpayers again pay one third. In Moscow this is approximately 13 percent of the total number of voters - the 1st and 2nd curia. All others - 3rd meeting. These meetings elect members of the City Duma, this is an administrative body. They also form the executive body - the city government. At the head of both is the city mayor. The city mayor was approved in county towns by the governor, in provincial ones - the Minister of Internal Affairs. City governance depends on the administration.

Also created provincial presence on city affairs, his Chairman - Governor. This institution can cancel any decision of the city government, so the administration is completely dependent here. Functions of city government- mainly economic issues:
1) external improvement of cities;
2) water supply, sewerage;
3) fire fighting;
4) development of trade and industry;
5) organization of public education and healthcare.

Registration of the constitutional monarchy in Russia. The State Duma.

The reason for the start of the revolution on January 9, 1905: 100 thousand workers came out with a petition to the tsar. The petition consists of two parts:

1) veropodonic;

2) in fact, the establishment of a constitutional monarchy and the introduction of basic democratic freedoms are required.

In the beginning of the revolution, 3 models of transformation were proposed:

1) conservative - you need to change the political system as little as possible, but as little as possible. The emperor adhered to this course until the fall of 1905;

2) liberal - Russia should develop according to the Western model: constitutionalism, parliamentarism, recognition of the rule of law, human and civil rights and state guarantees for civilized working and living conditions of people;

3) social democrats. A social state must emerge in Russia; it must protect and guarantee the rights of the working majority. This is a model for the future of building the foundations of socialism in the country.

In February 1905. The king signs 2 contradictory acts: "On the inviolability of autocracy", instructs Minister of Internal Affairs Bulygin to create draft law of the legislative body in the empire. The project will be ready in early August, but will no longer suit Russia. From January to the end of 1905, the revolution in the cities proceeded along an increasing line. In the fall of 1905, a general political strike begins, first.

The Tsar, under pressure from Witte, makes concessions and October 17, 1905 signs the manifesto "On improving public order", who proclaimed: 1) freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and association; 2) attracting broad sections of the population to the elections; 3) the mandatory procedure for approval by the State Duma of all laws issued. In his memoirs, Witte denies having forced the Tsar to sign the act. This is a manifesto, so the remaining provisions will be further detailed in other acts. The title itself recognizes that it is necessary to change the political system of the country.

At the beginning of the act, it is actually recognized that it appeared as a result of revolutionary actions, then 3 other provisions are formulated, which actually mean: Russia has embarked on the path of a constitutional monarchy.

Moscow, published Decree on amending the Regulations on elections to the State

Vienna Duma, which significantly expanded the circle of voters.

Almost the entire male population of the country over the age of 25, except soldiers, students, day laborers and some nomads, received

voting rights. The right to vote was not direct and remained

unequal for voters of different categories (curias).

February 20, 1906 act came out on the establishment of the State Duma, in which its competence was determined: preliminary development and discussion of legislative proposals, approval of the state budget, discussion of issues on the construction of railways and the establishment

joint stock companies. The Duma was elected for five years. Duma deputies

were not accountable to voters, their removal could be carried out

Senate. The Duma could be dissolved early by decision of the emperor.

With a legislative initiative, the Duma could include ministers who

missions of deputies and the State Council.

Simultaneously with the act establishing the Duma, a new Regulations on the State Council, which was reformed and became the upper house, which had the same rights as the Duma. All bills adopted by the Duma were then to be submitted to the State Council and only if accepted by the Council, submitted to the emperor for approval. Half of the reformed State Council were elected members, half were members of the “highest authority”

significance,” the chairman and vice-chairman were appointed annually by the emperor.

Basic laws of the empire in 1906. Contents of laws:

1) fix the unitary form of government;

2) secured special status of Finland. Finland has always had a special position in the empire;

3) secured status of the Russian language as the only one in the state.

4) from the emperor supreme power, autocratic. The emperor shares legislative power with the State Council of the State Duma

5) at the king's there is a mechanism that allows you to accept emergency legislation

6) the king had the right of initiative according to all laws, questions. Only the tsar could take the initiative to revise the basic laws of the empire, but only the State Duma changed the regulations on elections and the basic laws.

7) Executive power rests entirely with the emperor, he appoints and dismisses ministers, including the First Minister

8) Judicial power rests entirely with the emperor.

9) He has military power. He also declares the area to be in a state of emergency.

10) Foreign policy is entirely the prerogative of the emperor.

In the basic laws of the empire, for the first time, the rights and duties of the filed:

1) universal conscription for males;

2) obligation to pay taxes, duties and fees set aside by law;

3) no one can be persecuted, not otherwise than for a criminal act defined by law;

4) it is possible to detain a person only if this is determined by law;

5) inviolability of home;

6) right of assembly;

7) freedom of speech within the limits established by law;

8) right to form unions of subjects;

9) inviolability of property;

10) the right of applicants to change their place of residence and freely travel outside the state;

11) right to choose occupations;

12) the right to acquire and alienate property.

Civil law.

All-Russian Central Executive Committee in April 1918 accepted Decree on the abolition of inheritance , according to which all types of inheritance(by law and by will) were cancelled. After the death of the owner, the property belonging to him became state property, the inheritance mass was limited to the amount of 10 thousand rubles (all other property became the property of the state) and went

relatives of the deceased in the form of a “social security measure” with the right of management and disposal.

May 1918 - Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on donations , prohibiting any “free provision (transfer, assignment, etc.) of property worth more than ten thousand rubles.” Something drastic happened reduction in trade turnover, from which nationalized property and securities (shares, coupons) were seized.

State monopoly for bread, textiles, oil, matches, the turnover was extremely reduced. The glavkism system excluded commodity-money relations between enterprises, foreign trade monopoly excluded individuals and private capital from the sphere of export-import relations. Natural product exchange supplanted monetary relations.

Family law.

In December 1917, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars accepted decrees that abolished all restrictions(parental permission for marriage, difference in religion of the couple, etc.), legitimizing only the civil form of marriage and establishing freedom of divorce.

In September 1918, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee accepted Code of laws on acts of civil status, marriage, family and guardianship law. The Code emphasized that church marriage does not give rise to any legal consequences; the move of one of the spouses does not entail the obligation of the other to follow him; The principle of community of property between spouses was abolished.

Raising children was seen as a public responsibility of parents, and not as their private matter. Proclaimed principle of separation of property between parents and children, adoption was prohibited.

Labor law.

In December 1917, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee accepted Unemployment Insurance Regulations And Decree on health insurance . These social protection measures were provided from enterprise funds. In the spring of 1918, a new labor inspectorate was formed, elected by trade union organizations.

In December 1918. was accepted first Labor Code RSFSR (Labor Code), developed by the People's Commissariat of Labor and the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions and summarizing all previous Soviet labor legislation.

In April 1919 Council of People's Commissars issued Decree on general mobilization , implemented the proclaimed principle of labor service. Started in June introduction of work books, tightening the system of control over workers. The mobilization of unskilled labor was withdrawn from the trade unions and transferred to the People's Commissariat of Labor.

Land law.

In February 1919, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee published Regulations on socialist land management and measures for the transition to socialist agriculture . All land was designated as unified state fund. The fund was under the direct management and control of the relevant People's Commissariat. State farms, communes, and societies for joint cultivation of the land were created. All forms of individual land use are considered obsolete. The goal is creation of a unified production economy and gradual socialization of land use.

Criminal law.

In December 1919. People's Commissariat of Justice accepted Guidelines on criminal law RSFSR, which became the first attempt to generalize the practice of courts and tribunals. They consisted of an introduction, sections on the essence of criminal law, on criminal

justice, about crime and punishment, stages of crime, complicity, types of punishment, about probation, about space

actions of criminal law. The legislator refused exhaustive and complete regulation of all relations, relying on social instinct of the proletarian court.

When assigning punishment, the court had to take into account the degree and nature of the social danger of the criminal and his social affiliation. In this case, the punishment should be based on expediency its application.

Constitution of the RSFSR 1918

The basis of the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1918 was decrees of Soviet power And Declaration of the Rights of Working and Exploited People.

The draft Constitution was drafted by Constitutional Commission(chairman - Ya.M. Sverdlov), created under the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. The process of working on the project took 4 months and was accompanied by polemics and discussions.

The Constitution was adopted July 10, 1918 on V Congress of Soviets, published in Izvestia of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on July 19, 1918 and came into force at the same time.

Basic principles of the Constitution were formulated in its

six sections:

I. Declaration of the Rights of Working and Exploited People;

II. General provisions of the Constitution of the RSFSR;

III. Construction of Soviet power (organization of Soviet power in the Center and locally);

IV. Active and passive suffrage;

V. Budgetary law;

VI. About the coat of arms and flag of the RSFSR.

The Declaration defined social basis new statehood - dictatorship of the proletariat and her political basis - system of Soviets of Workers', Peasants' and Soldiers' Deputies.

State structure of the RSFSR wore federal character, subjects of the Federation were national republics.

The highest authority The Constitution proclaimed All-Russian Congress Councils of Workers', Soldiers', Peasants' and Cossacks' Deputies.

The congress elected those responsible to it All-Russian Central

Right.

The norms systematized in this way will amount to “ right obligatory for all", while all further legalizations will represent only technical instructions. This first approach to the issue of the legal system was due to practical necessity associated with the formation of the system of Soviet legislation.

20s became a period of intense codification work. Were adopted and came into effect Civil, Criminal, Land, Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure Codes, Labor Code, projects developed Economic, Trade, Industrial, Cooperative, Administrative codes.

ZK consisted of Basic provisions and 3 parts:

1) On labor land use;

2) About urban lands and state land

property;

3) About land management and resettlement.

ZK proclaimed abolition of private property on land, subsoil, water and forests. All agricultural lands were united into unified state land fund, administered

People's Commissariat of Agriculture.

All transactions with land (purchase, sale, will, donation, pledge) were prohibited under penalty of criminal punishment.

The state could only provide land for ownership and use.

Right of use could be possessed by labor landowners and their associations, urban settlements, government agencies and enterprises. The right to use land for agriculture

provided that all citizens of the RSFSR had access to it through their labor.

The land was provided for indefinite use,

which could be terminated only on the basis of a

Usage hired labor had restrictions: all able-bodied members of the peasant farm had to participate in agricultural work on an equal basis with hired workers, whose working conditions were regulated by the Labor Code of the RSFSR.

ZK established the following land use forms: communal with leveling divisions between yards, precinct(cut and farm plots) and friendly(agricultural commune, artel, partnership for the public cultivation of land).

As an exception, ZK allowed land lease, which was of a labor nature. The lease period was limited to one crop rotation. Renting was allowed in the event of a temporary weakening of the peasant economy due to a natural disaster, lack of labor, or crop failure.

The Land Code established the legal status peasant yard, which was an association of members of one or more families living in the same house and leading a joint household. At the head was the father of the family - a householder who led the peasant household. The Land Code provided the right to replace the householder in the event of unsatisfactory management of the yard, which was formalized by a resolution of the volost executive committee with the permission of the village council.

According to the Land Code, the right to review land disputes were endowed land commissions.

Criminal law eliminates emergency punitive measures, characteristic of the period of the Civil War, the plurality of normative acts of union and republican significance, receives a clear division into General and Special Parts And ends with the adoption in 1922 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR.

The Criminal Code gives a general concept of crime, highlighting public danger And illegality, Availability intent or negligence, however, recognizes any crime as actions and inactions that threaten the foundations of the Soviet system and law and order. This legitimizes arbitrariness in bringing to criminal liability without guilt, which became possible only on the basis of the social danger of a person, the presence or absence of which was determined by the court.

The Criminal Code declares it legal analogy and retroactive effect of criminal law, which in practice leads to increased judicial discretion in assessing the offense

and sentencing.

Among the criminal acts was excluded speculation , which was due to the implementation of the NEP.

A feature of the Criminal Code was the introduction of compositions counter-revolutionary crimes as the most dangerous.

Counter-revolutionary everything was admitted action aimed at destroying revolutionary achievements, the overthrow of Soviet power, providing assistance to the international bourgeoisie, whose goal was to overthrow the Soviet system through intervention, espionage, financing, etc.

Concept punishment becomes part social protection measures, the purpose of which is the general prevention of new violations by the offender or potential offender.

As capital punishment provided sme

Transformations. Soon a group of people close to him formed around the young king, which one of its members, Prince A.M. Kurbsky subsequently called it the Chosen Rada. At the head of this circle of serving nobility and courtiers were actually a nobleman from the rich, but not noble role of A.F. Adashev and the Tsar's confessor, Archpriest of Annunciation cathedral Kremlin Sylvester. They were joined by noble princes D. Kurlyatev, A. Kurbsky, N. Odoevsky, M. Vorotynsky and others. The Rada also included the first head of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, Duma clerk I.M. Viscous. Metropolitan Macarius actively supported the activities of this circle.

While not formally a state institution, the elected Rada was essentially the government Russia and for 13 years she ruled the state on behalf of the king, consistently implementing a series of major reforms. In their content, these transformations coincided with the demands of the petitions addressed to the Tsar, which were written in 1549 by the talented publicist nobleman I.S. Peresvetov. He advocated a decisive strengthening of the foundations Russian states.

The most important step of the government was the convening of the first Zemsky “Cathedral of Reconciliation” in 1549. The Council decided to draw up a new Code of Law (approved in 1550), which reflected new aspects of legal proceedings (control over governors, collection of a single state duty). The right to collect trade duties (tamgas) passed to the tsarist administration. The population had to bear the tax - a combination of natural and monetary duties.
In the middle XVI V. a uniform tax collection measure for the entire state was established - “plow” - a land unit that depended on the position of the owner and the quality of the land (on average from 400 to 600 hectares).

In order to strengthen the armed forces, in 1550 the government of Ivan IV began to carry out military reforms. Thus, localism (the procedure for filling positions in the army depending on nobility) was abolished for the duration of the campaigns.
The “selected thousand” were “placed” in the Moscow district - 1078 provincial nobles, who were supposed to form the core of the nobles militia, the support of autocratic power.

Finally, a unified procedure for military service was determined: “by fatherland” (by origin) and “by device” (by recruitment). Nobles and boyars' children (small feudal lords in the service of princes and boyars) served "for the fatherland." The service was regulated by the “Code of Service” published in 1556; it was inherited and began at the age of 15. Until this age, a nobleman was considered a minor. This category of service people was formally provided with a salary of 150 to 450 dessiatines in three fields and from 4 to 7 rubles per year. In fact, the state did not have that kind of money or that much free land. For every 150 acres of land, the boyars and nobles had to field one warrior “on horseback and in arms”; in case of failure, a fine was imposed.

In 1550, from among the service people, a rifle army was formed “according to the instrument”, which had both firearms (arquebuses) and bladed weapons (reeds and sabers). At first, 3 thousand people were recruited into the Streltsy, who were consolidated into “orders”. They formed the king's personal guard. By the end XVI V. In the permanent Streltsy army there were up to 25 thousand people, who were the most powerful fighting force of the Russian army.

The government of the Elected Rada paid great attention to strengthening the tsarist state apparatus. In the 1550s The order system is being improved. The bureaucracy is also growing.

In 1552, the Courtyard Notebook was created - a list of members of the Sovereign's court (about 4 thousand people), from among whom the highest officials of the state were appointed: military leaders, city governors, diplomats, etc.

Stoglavy Cathedral (1551). The tsarist government, interested in supporting the clergy, could not remain aloof from the urgent church reforms.
Even under Ivan III and Vasily II, the issue of church land ownership was acute. During the Council of the Hundred Heads, the issue of monastery lands was raised again. It was decided to preserve the lands of churches and monasteries, but in the future their acquisition or receipt as a gift could only be carried out after a report to the king.

Reforms middle XVI V. significantly strengthened central power and public administration, which allowed Ivan IV to move on to solving foreign policy problems.

The elected council existed until 1560. An important reason that caused its fall was disagreements with the family of the Tsar’s first wife, Anastasia Zakharyina, who died that year. But the main reason, however, was the problem of choosing the main paths of political development Russia. The elected Rada was a supporter of gradual reforms leading to strengthening of centralization. Ivan IV, nicknamed the Terrible, preferred the path of terror, which contributed to the rapid strengthening of his personal power. Leaders are happy A.F. Adashev and Archpriest Sylvester fell into disgrace and died in exile.

In 1564, one of the former leaders of the Chosen Rada, Prince Andrei Kurbsky, who commanded the Russian troops, went over to the side of the Poles, fearing for his life. This betrayal increased the king's suspicion of his surroundings.

Zemsky Sobor (1549)

The beginning of the reforms was the convening of the first Zemsky Sobor (1549) - an advisory body, which included representatives of the nobility, clergy, merchants, and townspeople. At the Zemsky Sobor, issues of foreign policy and finance were discussed, and complaints were heard. The Council decided to create a new Institute to replace the outdated Sudebnik of 1497, and formulated a reform program.

Central government reform

As a result of this reform, a new system of central government bodies was created - orders specialized by type of activity

The reform of legislative norms led to the creation of the Code of Law of 1550, which confirmed the right of peasants to transfer from one feudal lord to another only on St. George’s Day and increased the payment for the “elderly”. For the first time, liability for bribery was established.

Reform of the local government system. In 1556 the feeding system was abolished.

Results of reforms:

Reforms of the 50s of the 16th century. had the following results:

• *The centralization of the state and the personal power of the king increased;
• * The system of central and local government has become clearer and more effective;
• * The country's military power has grown;
• * There was a further enslavement of the Russian peasantry;

Skillfully playing on the feelings of his subjects, Ivan IV forced them to humbly ask him to return to Moscow several times. And when he finally agreed, he set his own conditions:

• 1) grant the tsar the right to extrajudicial reprisal against any “traitors”;
• 2) highlight the oprichnina - the personal destiny of the king;
• 3) recruit a special army for the tsar from thousands of selected boyars and nobles.

In 1565, Ivan IV established the oprichnina - a system of measures aimed at strengthening the autocracy and further enslaving the peasants.

Consequences of the oprichnina. The main goal of the oprichnina - to destroy the remnants of feudal fragmentation, to undermine the foundations of boyar-princely independence - was achieved, but, having eliminated political fragmentation, the oprichnina bled the country, demoralized the people, led to an exacerbation of contradictions within the country, and weakened its military power.

TOPIC 5 The world in the era of the heyday of pre-industrial civilization. The Time of Troubles and the further strengthening of autocracy in Russia at the end of the 16th - 17th centuries.

In 1547, under Ivan the Terrible, a new government was created - The chosen one is glad. The Rada included representatives of various strata of the ruling class. The Elected Rada was not an official government institution, but it ruled on behalf of the tsar for 13 years and was in fact the government. The members of the Elected Rada set their task to streamline the laws and government of the country, to find an expansion of sources of income to the treasury, taking into account the interests of both the serving nobility and the boyars. The reforms included the creation of a new system of central government -- orders. The composition of the Boyar Duma was expanded three times by Ivan IV. Zemsky Sobor. IN it included representatives of the boyars, serving nobility, clergy, merchants, and townspeople. The Zemsky Sobor discussed issues of foreign policy and finance, as well as the election of new kings. The first Zemsky Sobor was convened in 1549, it decided to draw up a new Sudebnik and formulated a program of reforms in the 16th century. The Zemsky Sobor in 1550 adopted a new Code of Law, which confirmed the right of peasants to move only on St. George’s Day and increased the payment for the “elderly.” In the XV-XVI centuries. Local government bodies were also created in Rus' - viceroy system. Reforms of the 50s XVI century Local government was also affected - the feeding system was abolished. In 1550, a military reform was carried out aimed at strengthening the country's armed forces. The agrarian reform of Ivan the Terrible was of exceptional importance. Ivan the Terrible dealt the final blow to the feudal estate in 1565, when he established oprichnina, which was a system of measures aimed at strengthening the autocracy and further enslaving the peasants. In 1572, Ivan the Terrible abolished the oprichnina and forbade even mentioning this hated word. At the beginning of the 16th century. An attempt was made to limit church land ownership, but then the supporters of the rich church, the so-called “money-grubbers,” won.