I.R. Sultanov, PhD in Political Science

Bashkir Academy of State Service and Management under the President

of the Republic of Bashkortostan

Ufa, Bashkortostan, Russia Federation

The issues of the correlation of the international and domestic norms in the integration process

 

The article is devoted to the current issues of the international law. International integration organizations are currently playing a more significant role in the development of the international law. The integration of new institutes of the international law is occurring more rapidly due to the development of the integration organizations. The research looks at the issue of the international cooperation prospects in the context of the influence of the integration associations upon it.

The process of the parity of norms of the international and national legal systems involves recently more and more steadfast attention of jurists. It, first of all, is defined by the objective process of the international cooperation of the states where relations of subjects are regulated by the international law, amplifying influence of the internal law on economic, sociopolitical relations in the country. It is important to notice that this problem is not thus in purely theoretical space.

Among them is a general principle of market-base of the national economies, meaning reduction of a role and participation of the governments (those of public level) in the regulation of private legal relations – business. The principle of a free competition, i.e. an antimonopoly policy and management of the state help. It is expressed in economy demonopolization, mainly in such natural monopolies, as railway transportation, telecommunications, electric power and gas industries; as well as an interdiction for rendering of the state help and assuming leading position in a commodity or services market [2]. In these conditions, the traditional interstate cooperation (interstate trade, mutual aid) gives way to cooperation of private persons – corporations and other enterprises (the investment, bank, insurance business, private trade). Finally, the introduction of the "national treatment" for foreign enterprises, facilitating business management in other state. In some directions preferential relations are possible also.

The Liberalization of national economies of member states is that requirement which derive from the specified GATT/WTO agreements, the members of which are all countries of the EU, NAFTA, central Africa or, say, the OPEC. However, in the EU the legitimacy of the GATT imperatives has not come along without fluctuations. As was marked by the professor U.M.Yumashev, «in the early nineteen sixties, the Court considered that the obligations emerge from the GATT agreement, concluded earlier by the member states, does not operate concerning the Community» [9, p.195]. However, «in the early seventies, after the completion of the transition period, the Court in its decisions underlined that obligations of member states in GATT devolve upon the Community in the process of the expansion of its external competence» [9, p.195].

Therefore, if the European power charter, as well as the 1994ã. Agreement to it  [10] are to be mentioned, they already are the documents that demand from the "Contracting parties", those that are not the GATT/WTO members, reorganization of their internal economic relations systems on the liberal model. The integration unions collectively achieve these purposes easier. EU though and through bills of a smaller, than GATT scale (on a circle of participants), suggests to introduce the same economic rules that we have specified above. It is natural that the states, which have only recently left the socialist forms of state system, quite often experience problems of the incompatibility of their economic and legal systems. Some enjoy the priority of state, while others – a private-corporative approach. As the result, the incompatibility of the legal and economic traditions leads to an ineffective or simply inert agreement. For example, F.Lukyanov quite truly writes concerning Russia that «the dialogue about the expansion of the Russia’s deliveries in EU was beyond the utilitarian frameworks «goods – money – goods» and has turned into a basic discussion about the future of Russia’s economy» [11].

Indeed, if we are to compare the Agreement to the European power charter of 1994 and the GATT agreement, is evident that it only somewhat elaborates the GATT provisions, but does not add anything conceptually new to those principles, that the states groupings are to follow according to the 1947 and 1994 agreements. The latter, by the way, in the stated agreement are mentioned time and again as primary [10]. Let us compare: it is the freedom of competition, the principle of non-discrimination, the allegiance to the union market, as well as to the Eurocommunity itself, and the preservation of the environment with its own principle (the pollutant pays). All these general provisions on ECT market liberalization only concretize them with reference to the energy sector, addressing them to specific states. New in the specified Charter and the Agreement to it is only one - involving into the sphere of the convention not just 27 EU states, but 51 state, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mongolia, Japan, Ukraine and many other not European states by far. And, the second is a requirement of access of the West European managers to gas-transport networks of all states, noy excluding those, which are not a part of this integration structure.  

The list of the used sources:

1.                 The consolidated version of the European Union Agreement and the Agreement establishing the European community. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the EC, 1997. 

2.                 EU promotes strengthening of a competition of the free market in Russia//the Press release. Moscow, Representative office of the European Commission in Russia.15th of September, 2003. //http:// www.eur.ru

3.                 Koretsky V.M. The general principles of the law in international law. Kiev, 1957.

4.                 Gerchikova I.N. The international economic organizations: regulation of inter-economic relations and enterprise activity. The manual – Moscow, JSC "Konsultbankir" Publishing house, 2000. 23p.

5.                 Andris Piebalgs. The European Commission member on energy issues//the Bulletin of the Representative office of the European Commission in the Russian Federation// http://www.vestnik.eu-visibility.ru/