Legalization of state power. What does the concept of “legitimacy” mean in a general sense and “legitimacy of political power. Legitimacy: what is it?

Legalization of state power - this is a legal declaration and consolidation of the legality of its occurrence (establishment), organization and activity. Firstly, its origin must be legal. Usurpation, seizure of state power, its appropriation are illegal. Secondly, the organization of power must be legitimate. In a modern state, it is established by the constitution and other laws and cannot be implemented without the direct participation of the people (elections, referendums, etc.), without representative bodies, parliaments, etc. Thirdly, the sphere of authority of state power, the range of relations that state power has the right and can regulate, must be legal.

Legalization of state bodies power, the procedure for their creation, activities are also carried out by other legal acts: laws (for example, laws on the elections of the State Duma and the President of the Russian Federation), presidential decrees (for example, the decrees of the President of the Russian Federation approved provisions on the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, etc. .), government decrees, decrees of constitutional control bodies.

The legalization of state power, the justification of power, the right to govern the state is rooted in legal acts and can, therefore, under certain conditions, be only external legalization, legally enshrining anti-people, anti-democratic, even terrorist state power. These were the legal acts of Hitler's Germany, which proclaimed the undivided power of the Fuhrer...

Violation of the principle of legality (legal norms) implies legal liability of state bodies and officials - political (resignation of the government, impeachment of the president), criminal (trial for illegal use of state power in the performance of official duties), civil (compensation for damage caused to the state, legal and individuals in the illegal use of government power).

Legitimacy- this state is not legal, but factual, not necessarily formal, but more often informal. Legitimation of state power - these are the processes and phenomena through which it acquires the property of legitimacy, expressing correctness, justification, fairness, moral “legitimacy”, its compliance with universal human values, compliance with the authorities, its activities with certain mental attitudes, the challenges of society and people. Legitimate state power -) power that corresponds to the ideas of the people of a given country about clear state power.

Legitimation of state power finds its expression in the support of this government by the population, as evidenced by the results of voting in the presidential and parliamentary elections, the results of a referendum, mass demonstrations in support of the government, which, for example, is threatened by the forces of reaction, approval of draft decisions proposed by government bodies at national or local discussions.

It is customary to distinguish between three main forms: traditional, charismatic and rational legitimation.

Traditional legitimation associated with customs, sometimes with the special role of religion, with personal, tribal, class dependence. Charismatic legitimation- due to the special qualities of outstanding personalities. Such qualities may include natural abilities, prophetic gifts, fortitude and words. This is also facilitated by the created cult of personality around the “leader”. Rational legitimation based on reason: the population supports or rejects state power, guided by its own assessment of this power. The basis of rational legitimation is the practical activities of state power, the work of state bodies for the benefit of the population.

The concept of legitimation of state power seems more complex. Legitimus means legal, legalized, like legalization, but this concept is not legal, but factual, although legal elements may be part of it. The modern meaning of this concept is associated with the research of political scientists, primarily the German scientist Max Weber (1864-1920).

Legitimation often has nothing to do with the law at all, and sometimes even contradicts it. This is a process, not necessarily formal and even most often informal, through which state power acquires the property of legitimacy, i.e. a state that expresses the correctness, justification, expediency, legality and other aspects of the compliance of a specific state power with the attitudes and expectations of the individual, social and other groups, and society as a whole. Recognition of state power and its actions as legitimate is based on sensory perception, experience, and rational assessment. It is based not on external signs (although, for example, the oratorical abilities of leaders can have a significant impact on the public, contributing to the establishment of charismatic power), but on internal motivations, internal incentives. The legitimation of state power is not associated with the publication of a law, the adoption of a constitution (although this may also be part of the legitimation process), but with a complex of experiences and internal attitudes of people, with the ideas of various segments of the population about compliance with state power; by its bodies the norms of social justice, human rights, and their protection.

Illegitimate power is based on violence and other forms of coercion, including mental influence, but legitimation cannot be imposed on people from the outside, for example, by force of arms or the revelation of a “good” constitution by a monarch to his people. It is created by people’s devotion to a certain social system (sometimes to a certain person), which expresses the immutable values ​​of existence. The basis of this kind of devotion is the belief of people that their benefits depend on the preservation and support of a given order, a given state power, the belief that they express the interests of the people. Therefore, the legitimation of state power is always connected with the interests of people, various segments of the population. And since the interests and needs of various groups, due to limited resources and other circumstances, can only be partially satisfied or only the demands of some groups can be fully satisfied, the legitimation of state power in society, with rare exceptions, cannot have a comprehensive, universal character: what is legitimate for some, appears as illegitimate for others. One can cite many examples of the different interests of certain segments of the population and their unequal, often opposite, attitudes towards the measures of state power and towards the government itself. Therefore, its legitimation is not associated with the approval of the entire society (this is an extremely rare option), but with acceptance by the majority of the population while respecting and protecting the rights of the minority. It is this, and not the dictatorship of a class, that makes state power legitimate.

Legitimation of state power gives it the necessary authority in society. The majority of the population voluntarily and consciously submits to it, the legal demands of its bodies and representatives, which gives it stability, stability, and the necessary degree of freedom in the implementation of state policy. The higher the level of legitimation of state power, the wider the opportunities for leading society with minimal “force” costs and expenditures of “managerial energy”, with greater freedom for self-regulation of social processes. At the same time, the legitimate government has the right and obligation, in the interests of society, to apply coercive measures provided for by law if other methods of stopping antisocial actions do not produce results.

But an arithmetic majority cannot always serve as the basis for genuine legitimation of state power. The majority of Germans under Hitler's regime adopted a policy of "race cleansing" and territorial claims, which ultimately led to great misfortune for the German people. Consequently, not all assessments of the majority make state power truly legitimate. The decisive criterion is its compliance with universal human values. Chirkin V.E. Legalization and legitimation of state power [Electronic resource] // State and law. - M.: Nauka, 1995, No. 8. - P. 65-73

The legitimation of state power is assessed not by the words of its representatives (although this is important), not by the texts of the programs and laws it has adopted (although this is important), but by its practical activities, by the way it resolves fundamental issues in the life of society and each individual. The population sees the difference between slogans about reforms and democracy, on the one hand, and authoritarian ways of making decisions that are most important for the fate of the country and the people, on the other.

The legitimation of state power can and, as a rule, includes its legalization. But legitimation is in conflict with formal legalization if legal laws do not correspond to the norms of justice, general democratic values, and attitudes prevailing among the majority of the country's population. In this case, legitimation is either absent (for example, the population has a negative attitude towards the totalitarian order established by the authorities), or in the course of revolutionary events, national liberation movements, another legitimation occurs - anti-state, rebel, pre-state power established in the liberated areas, which then becomes state power power.

Legitimation is usually associated with the legal analysis of the preparation and adoption of the constitution, with the study of decisions of constitutional courts and other bodies of constitutional control, and with the analysis of data from elections and referendums. Less attention is paid to the content of constitutional acts, the nature of the activities of state power, comparison of the programs of political parties and the policies pursued by those in power. Very rare is the scientific analysis of programs in comparison with the actions of various high officials.

It is even more difficult to identify indicators of legitimation. In this case, the results of elections and referendums are also used, but in the first case, falsification is common, and the second does not always reflect the true sentiments of the people, since these results are determined by transitory factors. In many developing countries with a one-party system (Ghana, Burma, Algeria, etc.), in parliamentary and presidential elections the ruling party received an overwhelming majority of votes, but the same population remained completely indifferent to the military coups that overthrew this government. At the 1991 referendum on the question of preserving the USSR, the majority of voters gave an affirmative answer, but a few months later the USSR collapsed due to the indifference of a significant part of the same voters. Thus, formal assessments used in legalization require a deep and comprehensive analysis when determining the legitimacy of state power. http://filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s01/z0001084/st000.shtml

Thus, the legitimation of state power is associated not with the publication of a law, the adoption of a constitution, but with a complex of experiences and internal attitudes of people, with the ideas of various segments of the population about compliance with state power; by its bodies the norms of social justice, human rights, and their protection. The legitimation of state power is assessed not by the words of its representatives, not by the texts of the programs and laws it has adopted, but by its practical activities, by the ways it resolves fundamental issues in the life of society and each individual.

Where is the legitimacy of power in Ukraine?

Probably every adult and educated person has heard in life concept of legitimacy. But not everyone thought about the origin and meaning of this concept. In everyday and conversational life, probably, few people use this concept. It is most used in politics when it concerns the legality of resolving any issues or situations.

The word legitimacy comes from the Latin “legitimus” and is translated as legal or lawful. Politicians use this word when the people agree with the current government and accept all its decisions regarding the legality. In other words, when the people trust the management of the state (an individual entity, a city), agree with the decisions made by the authorities, and submit to this authority, then this authority is considered legitimate.

In history, unfortunately, there are quite a few cases when coups d'état took place and self-proclaimed individuals began to rule the people. Naturally, this power was not recognized by the people and was considered illegitimate, since it was not chosen by the people and the people naturally do not trust this power. As a result, all actions and decisions are usually called not legitimate actions. The concept of legitimacy of power is closely connected with recent events in Ukraine, since it was after the coup d’etat that self-proclaimed individuals began to commit illegitimate actions. And the power itself is considered illegitimate.

The difference between the concept of legitimacy and legality of power

The concepts of legitimacy and legality should not be confused. These are two different concepts. Legality is a legally valid action to comply with regulatory legal acts. The slide below shows the concepts of legality and legitimacy.

The difference between legitimacy and legality

Types of legitimacy of power

1. Traditional;
2. Democratic;
3. Charismatic;
4. Technocratic;
5. Ontological
The meanings of certain types of concepts of legitimacy mentioned above can be found on the slides below. The general concept of legitimacy is revealed.

The concept of traditional legitimacy

The concept of rational legitimacy

The concept of ideological legitimacy

LEGITIMATION OF THE STATE

State legitimation is a process that results in a state obtaining the status of a legitimate state. Let's say there is a state in a country, this state is ruled by a monarch, and the state itself controls the population of the country (or country). The right of the monarch to govern the state is not questioned either by his subjects, or by the monarchs of neighboring and distant countries, or by the subjects of other monarchs. The monarch has the right to govern the state from GOD; the monarch negotiates not with the Lord himself, but with his universally recognized representative, for example, the Pope. In the country of Russia, the Tsar was crowned in the Orthodox Church. The population (people) had to consider all extortions of the state, all decrees and orders legal.
But at a certain historical moment in some countries, people suddenly decided that everything was not so simple with monarchs and states. That people themselves should have some rights, that it is they who can either recognize states as legitimate, or deny them legitimacy and overthrow monarchs. It seems that the state can then be legitimate and have the right to violence when the people of the country give it this right. And not just the people, but a capable part of it - a part of the people that is organized into a nation. To negotiate with a state, a nation must have the status of a legal entity. Only in this case, two legal entities, one of which represents the state, and the other represents the nation of the country, can conclude a written agreement - the National Constitution. Any other situation, when, for example, the state issues laws, controls their implementation, judges for their violation and carries out punishment, is a situation where the state is not legitimate, i.e. illegal. It does not have a document through which it can be concluded that it has the right to rule the country and the right to use violence.
Thus, peoples who achieve statehood but are not organized into a nation do not have a legitimate state. Although in the recent past, states in countries without nations were legitimate, legitimate. And even earlier, principalities, kingdoms, and empires were legal. In our time, states of such forms can be considered gangster and fraudulent states. They are based on force and can exist as long as they have the resources and means of violence to maintain power. The organization of the peoples of the country into a nation, the creation of a representative body of the nation that would organize and maintain the state of the country, is the legalization and legitimation of the state of the country, which becomes a national state. In such a country, not only stateization is possible, but also nationalization. When nationalization is replaced by stateization, then this is simply fraud, which takes place under an illegal state.

“ARTICLE 15, part 3. Laws are subject to official publication. Unpublished laws do not apply. Any regulations affecting the rights, freedoms and responsibilities of man and citizen cannot be applied unless they are officially published for public information" (Reference publication, aniktamalyk basla, LAWS AND CODES, CONSTITUTION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, as of 2014, LLC " Publishing house "Eksmo", M, 2014, p.5).
In what space is the law located? What is the seat of the law? Where can I find the law? What does it mean to publish a law? This means organizing the production of certain means of writing that will correspond to some original, which is also a means of writing. But a means of writing is a certain construction made of certain materials, for example, it is a construction made of paper and compounds added to the paper, for example, ink. One can definitely say (or deny?) that there cannot be a law in any construction made of paper and ink. The law is what the user of the design receives in himself and considers it to be law. Thus, the law can be exclusively in a person as some of his body structure, which determines the nature of his activity in certain situations. Each individual has his own law. The coordination of individual laws is carried out using certain means that can be identified by users with the law and accepted as a law that exists independently of them. This inadequacy of people is the basis for managing them. Thus, the violence of some against others is hidden for a person by his own attitude, according to which there is a law that everyone must obey.
“ARTICLE 17 1. In the Russian Federation, the rights and freedoms of man and citizen are recognized and guaranteed in accordance with generally accepted principles and norms of international law and in accordance with this Constitution” - (corresponds to publications of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).
The basis for citizens of the Russian Federation to turn to external international organizations is the fact that they do not have a representative body of power that they could use in the event of a conflict with their own state. Consequently, the appeal of capable and active citizens to international organizations in the event of a conflict with their own state is justified. If the Russian Federation wants to change this situation, it must initiate its own nationalization - initiate the organization of citizens into a nation, initiate the creation of a representative body of the nation and subordinate itself economically and politically to this body.