| Summary: | Background. In the era of global transformation, affecting the sphere of state
building, the importance of complex, federal systems is increasing. To describe them, it is
advisable to use unified approaches in the form of models, an important component of
which is such a structural unit as the constitutional federal process. The purpose of the
article is to develop the characteristics of the process of this type and compare its course in
the leading federations of the world. Materials and methods. The author uses materials
from the constitutions of the world’s leading federations, and in a number of cases – and
court decisions, which assess federal relations. The article is based on comparative legal
and comparative state studies methods. Results. The study of federations of the first settlement
type (USA, Canada, Australia) indicates their complete or almost complete constitutional
monism. In the adaptation of constitutional laws, court decisions played a certain role
(and for the United States a leading role). At the same time, Canada demonstrates a paradoxical
deviation in the course of its development from a centralized to a decentralized federation.
For European federations (Switzerland, Austria, Germany), one or another version
of constitutional pluralism is more characteristic. Switzerland experienced evolutionary
constitutional transformations, while Austria and Germany were marked by an intermittent
constitutional process. Switzerland was characterized by a gradual weakening of the original
decentralization, Austria managed to maintain an initially centralized state, and Germany
was predominantly characterized by a moderately centralized development vector. India,
as the most successful postcolonial federation under constitutional monism, has managed to
rely on its flexible use and strengthen highly centralized federal relations. A rigid, centralized
vector of development was implemented in the Soviet-Russian model of federalism,
and it was based on constitutional pluralism. In Soviet times, its foundation was Marxist
ideology, in post-Soviet times, Eurasian identity. Conclusions. Among the leading federations
of the world, there is a significant multivariance of the constitutional federal process,
which prompts researchers to abandon any pre-agreed dogmas about “right” or “wrong”
federalism.
|
|---|
