Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.39 N° 69
Julio
Diciembre
2021
Recibido el 03/03/2021 Aceptado el 16/06/2021
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 39, Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre) 2021, 605-614
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
The modern law-making process:
structure and main problems
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3969.37
Mikhail B. Rumyantsev *
Vladislav Yu. Turanin **
Sergey Yu. Sumenkov ***
Marina G. Smirnova ****
Esita E. Ganaeva *****
Abstract
Through the dialectical method the objective of the article
was to analyze the process of the elaboration of modern laws,
considering their structure and main problems. There is a major
structure and problems inherent in the modern law-making
process described in the article. The structure of law-making
comprises four parts: 1. Cognitive-analytical part; 2. Theoretical
foundations of the legal norms and acts they dictate; 3. Validation
of legal act or norm; 4. Monitoring of relevant rules and legal acts. The main
legislative task is to draft legal norms that stimulate the active development
of all parts of the State and society through a deep perception of all related
processes, including those involving standard-setting. It is concluded that
the main factor aecting the quality of legislation is the lack of a uniform
legislative basis for the issuance of legal acts. There seems to be a real need
to develop a uniform legislative act on the law-making process. The Code
containing general and specic parts of each law must be developed.
Keywords: legislative process; legal norm; structure of the law; problems
of legislation; modern laws.
* PhD in Law, FGNC VNIMP names after V.M. Gorbatova, 26, Talalikhina Street, Moscow, 109316,
Russia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9853-5745. Email: mikrumjancev@rambler.ru
** Doctor of Law, Belgorod State University, 85 Pobeda Street, Belgorod, 308015, Russia. ORCID ID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3105-9932. Email: turanin@mail.ru
*** Doctor of Law, Penza State University, 40, Krasnaya Street, Penza, 440026, Russia. ORCID ID: https://
orcid.org/0000-0002-4974-2406. Email: sumenkov@bk.ru
**** Doctor of Law, North-West branch Of the Russian University of Justice, 5, Alexandrovsky Park, St.
Petersburg, 197046, Russia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4427-2505. Email: msm777@
inbox.ru
***** PhD in Law, Chechen state University, 32, A. SHeripova, Groznyj, 364024, Russia. ORCID ID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7394-1843. Email: esita4me@mail.ru
606
Mikhail B. Rumyantsev, Vladislav Yu. Turanin, Sergey Yu. Sumenkov, Marina G. Smirnova y
Esita E. Ganaeva
The modern law-making process: structure and main problems
El proceso moderno de elaboración de leyes:
estructura y principales problemas
Resumen
Mediante el método dialéctico el objetivo del artículo fue analizar el
proceso de la elaboración de leyes modernas, considerando su estructura
y principales problemáticas. Hay una estructura y problemas principales
inherentes al proceso moderno de elaboración de leyes que se describen
en el artículo. La estructura de la elaboración de leyes comprende cuatro
partes: 1. Parte cognitiva-analítica; 2. Fundamentos teóricos de las normas
jurídicas y actos que dictan; 3. Validación de acto o norma jurídica; 4.
Seguimiento de las normas y actos legales pertinentes. La principal tarea
legislativa es redactar las normas legales que estimulen un desarrollo activo
de todas las partes del Estado y de la sociedad a través de una percepción
profunda de todos los procesos relacionados, incluidos los que presentan el
establecimiento de normas. Se concluye que el principal factor que afecta la
calidad de la legislación es la falta de un fundamento legislativo uniforme
que determine la emisión de actos jurídicos. Parece surgir la necesidad real
de desarrollar un acto legislativo uniforme sobre el proceso de elaboración
de leyes. Se debe desarrollar el Código que contiene partes generales y
especícas de cada ley.
Palabras clave: proceso legislativo; norma jurídica; estructura de la ley;
problemas de la legislación; leyes modernas.
Introduction
The public relationships are mainly formed in unregulated fashion as
aected by social, economic, political and other processes continuously
changing in state. The precondition for legal norms issuing is perception of
the situations, factors and enactments promoting the development of the
public relationships legally regulated for the convenience of social progress.
The law-making activity to regulate public relationships is rstly associated
with relationships ordering via law norms which requires providing certain
forms and patterns – it means the relationships should be formally dened
and expressed via language of the terms, categories and institutions which
are well-known and familiar to the law sciences (Besson and Martí, 2018;
Kozenkova et al., 2021). It should be taken into account that legal normative
acts are issued by dierent law-making bodies diering form each other via
rank and competence as well as varied properties. This state of things has
a strong inuence on available laws and by-laws nature which can often
contradict each other (Widiati, 2018; Bobrovnyk et al., 2020). All listed
above determines the introduction of the new science with its structure
607
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 605-614
and main problems of scientic concerning’s. The structure of law-making
as new science is closely related to the legal act ranking. Ranking of the
statutory acts assumes a subsequence for their location from inferior
acts to the superior ones taking into account their power as well as their
intersubordination related to other statutory acts (Nemirova and Savelyeva,
2020; Gava et al., 2021).
1. Methods
To describe the legal events and facts, the general scientic dialectic
method is used. When classifying four parts of law-making as science,
dierent techniques and methods are used. Those are analyses and
synthesis, inductive and deductive methods, comparing, formal method.
Formal logical approach is used when analyzing the mechanism of creation
of the new legal terms dealing with main law-making tasks. Using of
techniques and methods from above could add and slightly modify the
general dialectic methods to make it to serve the new researching needs
and objectives. The new modications of the method would ll the research
objectives they are charged with.
2. Discussion and Results
Currently, the legal science mainly considers the law-making process as
authorized state bodies’ activities aimed to production as well as change
and cancels of legal norms (Besson and Martí, 2018; Magradze, 2020).
Such approach to understand the law-making addresses pertinently to one
of its parties which is legal norm drafting when the legal norm is produced
by authorized body and then enforced in acting.
However, the law-making should not be deduced to understand it only
as the activity for legal act issuing as far as it solves the broader tasks. In a
fair try that the law-making covers even more signicant range of activities:
1) Preparation of legal act concept and project; 2) Detection of the need
to regulate legally some or other public relationships; 3) Determination of
regulative character and power direction (Gava et al., 2021).
The law-making subject also uses other demands to their content: 1) An
agreement between public relationships progressively developing, social
interests, needs and legal norms; 2) Correctly determined need to regulate
legally some or other relationships; 3) Legitimacy of legal acts themselves,
their accordance to international, constitutional and other superior
norms; 4) An agreement between legal norms and commonly received
moral, habit norms, big-hearted, human and fairy ideas, universal values;
608
Mikhail B. Rumyantsev, Vladislav Yu. Turanin, Sergey Yu. Sumenkov, Marina G. Smirnova y
Esita E. Ganaeva
The modern law-making process: structure and main problems
5) Clarity, apprehensibility, lucidity of the legal provisions; 6) Correct
determination of legal regulation level; 7) Non-contradictive legal norms,
their systematization; 8) Presence of necessary duty norms, the character
of the legal sanctions (Bobrovnyk et al., 2020).
In other words, when creating the legal norms, the law-making subjects
have to take into account many factors associated not only with standard
setting but with solving the tasks of the larger scale: promoting the further
development of whole state legal system and public relationships established
therein, striking their modernization, preventing of social conicts and
establishing of legal mechanisms for their annihilation, etc (Konasinghe,
2020; Nemirova and Savelyeva, 2020).
The main law-making task is to write the legal norms stimulating an
active development of all state and society parts via profound perception
of all processes related including those presenting the standard setting.
When drafting the legal acts, the law-making subject should resolve the
task consisting of three main components: noesis, activity and result, which
form relatively complete cycle when their dialectic mutual transition takes
place (Konasinghe, 2020). Writing the legal norm outside of this cycle seems
not to be possible because its writing must be drawn from the needs that
may have been indicated via noesis and procedures of authorized bodies for
norm issuing succeeding thereafter.
However, the legal acts developed are not practically science-
backgrounded, are written topically of the day and do not consider the main
trends of social, economic, and political development of state and society.
This causes their rapid obsoleting. The legal acts issued do not encourage the
public relationships participants to observe them. The law-making subjects
formulate the legal provisions mainly via conventional way when behavior
rule and sanction for its break-up are provided. In contemporary legal
reality, the law-making solution should maximally contain the indorsements
for active willful observations of the normative provisions promoted by all
parties of relationships via inclusion of all interests in the modication
of legal norm. It is understood that legal norms must regulate the public
relationships as well as spur their development in the direction and in the
interests of all state and society rather than for individual interested group.
The law-making subjects give the go-by a stage of perception of the needs for
public relationships regulation and so that make the law-making solutions
without necessary background, executability, controllability. A durability of
such legal acts are also neglected (Umedov, 2021; Gava et al., 2021).
Moreover, the most important factor inuencing the whole quality of
law-making is the absence of uniform legislative procedures determining
an order for drafting and issuing of Russian acts.
609
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 605-614
All of these problems and other nd out by the scientists are also caused
by the fact that legal science describing the law-making process, as uniform
law-making activity background had not been yet formed.
So that, the law-making subjects must assume that elaborating the
law-making solution is a unied whole process that covers also the noesis
or investigation of given public relationships and then the elaborating
of legal norms aimed at regulation of the relationships. Without a stage
of perception of the nature, content of public relationships, without
denition of the grounds causing the objective need to enforce legally the
public relationships, it is untenable to include them into the only possible
legal form. This is due to the fact that at the rst stage the law-making
subject investigates the public relationships for the objective need and
real possibility to regulate them via legal norms, i.e. percepts their legal
content, while at the second stage it creates a project of suitable norm which
is capable to provide the qualitative functioning of the relationships, i.e. the
form by which the indicated content could be expressed is then determined
(Bobrovnyk et al., 2020).
The modern state-of-art of law-making theory as whole systematized
legal science constituting the grounds for law-making activity is insucient
(Mcnamara et al., 2019). The law-making sciences and procedures for legal
solutions develop without signicant interaction. An evident contradiction
has raised: the recent needs for scientic comprehension and theoretical
background of law-making activity are not rstly taken into considerations
by law-making bodies, which continue to issue the legal acts following trials
and feedback, and secondly, they are poorly considered in law-making
theory that is formed without scientic concept and system in the vagarious
way (Nemirova and Savelyeva, 2020).
Numerous papers of Russian scientists concern this problem; a need
to create the scientic backgrounds for law-making process is highlighted.
The modern legal reform sets out a recent task to modify radically the
jurisprudence followed by the setting apart individual norms with legal
nature for general state and law theory among which the science dealing
with rulemaking and legal workmanship called “nomography” must take
rightful place (Magradze, 2020).
“Normographiya” i.e., science dealing with legal workmanships which
was presented to the scientic community well qualies its objective
declared because it contains mainly the methodology to product one or
others law-making solutions. Nevertheless, law-making theory as individual
legal science should not handle such narrow task. As law books note,
the law-making theory interest range should include all diversity of law-
making activities. It begins with the pre-project study of legal regulation
scope, scientic background of the need and necessity to enforce legally
the relevant public relationships and nishes with standard norm setting
carried out during law-making process at all levels.
610
Mikhail B. Rumyantsev, Vladislav Yu. Turanin, Sergey Yu. Sumenkov, Marina G. Smirnova y
Esita E. Ganaeva
The modern law-making process: structure and main problems
Moreover, the law-making theory being individual legal science must
have own denitions, idealized theoretical models of solutions for typical
social events. Therefore, the law-making theory must produce the scientic
criteria of feasibility, quality and eectiveness for such of the solutions, to
create own approaches to resolve the law-making tasks, to produce uniform,
simple and readable legal terms, categories, institutions etc., that should be
friendly to the setting bodies.
Generally, it is necessary to proceed from assumption that law-making
as legal science is the law branch determining the public relationships to be
regulated via legal norms, establishing the causes for the legal enforcing,
proving an objective need to realize the legal provisions in the point of view
of legal workmanship and presence of physical, human and other assets to
do this well, and in the same way, it is the science studying the methods
and procedures to issue the legal acts, ways to change, add and cancel them
when considering the social, political and economic processes developing
in the state.
As it happens, the law-making theory should be a scientic background
of all legal act issuing process rather than standard setting because quality
and eectiveness of legal regulation is rstly reached through the foundation
of its necessity and subsequently perfectiveness of legal norms issued.
Disregard of appeared needs for theoretical providing of the legal acts
intensively issued at all law-making levels is to sidetrack a problem of
necessity to transfer the law-making process from empirical eld into the
hemisphere where the solutions are made based on the scientic knowledge.
Due to this, law-making science should introduce in its subject matter all
aspects of the law-making solution elaboration. Therefore, the law-making
science must include the following suciently separate but then logically
bracketed structural elements.
1. Cognitive-analytical part. It is a primary stage allowing the law-making
subject to nd out and justify the need to regulate certain public relationships
in normative manner. The law-making science has to create the procedures
to nd out such of relationships; to justify the objective needs making the
legislator to their normative consolidation; to indicate the criteria by which a
possibility to enforce legally the public relationships in view of rule-making
procedures, physical assets and form of incorporation for realization of
legal norms issued, is assessed; to provide for the determination ways of
the consequences which could be appeared due to the legal norm acting; to
elaborate the mechanism allowing to resolve the problem about possibility
or impossibility to control the legal norm realization.
At presence, it is the most dicult part of the law-making theory because
it remains mostly outside of the Russian scientists’ eyesight.
611
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 605-614
2. Theoretical basics of the legal norms and acts issuing. This is a
part concerning directly the issuing of legal norms due to their textual
formulating.
The law-making theory has to break new scientic ground for all cycle of
legal enforcement of public relationships regulated:
1. Choice of law branch for public relationships to be regulated.
2. Specication of legal norm kind (imperative, dispositive)
(Konasinghe, 2020).
3. Scientic background for legal norm content.
4. Proving of use of the modicateur giving the peculiarities to the
legal norm realization.
5. Issuing a variation of the legal norm elaborated in accordance to
the creative law-making principles etc.
6. Organizational culture is also shown to be an important factor in
explaining compliance with the law (Gava et al., 2021).
3. Validation of legal act or norm. This part concerns the process of
issuing the legal acts carried out by each of law-making subject.
The law-making theory must produce the most important scientic
traits to transfer the scientically formulated text of the coming legal norms
into the range of authorized state provisions mandatory for all persons
addressed (Besson and Martí, 2018; Umedov, 2021).
As a rule, it comprises a long-term stage legislatively enforced as certain
process regulations. For the present purpose, the law-making task is to
create user-friendly and eective mechanism for issuing of qualitative legal
norms and acts.
These standards and rules may also stem from other environmental
conventions with diering contracting parties. To which kind of standards
and rules the reference is made is a question of interpretation and involves
the risk of future disputes among the contracting parties and the organization
if the reference does not relate to specic instruments (Romanovskaya et
al., 2020).
It should be born in mind that law-making process against political
parties’ competition provides issuing uneasily poor legal acts dierent
by their social, economic, and political content; as a rule, there are the
acts voted by the ruling party dominating the parliament. The same
phenomenon can be observed in medicine eld, where society has chosen
to use the concept of the profession as a means of organizing the services
of the healer, professionalism has come to serve as the basis of this social
612
Mikhail B. Rumyantsev, Vladislav Yu. Turanin, Sergey Yu. Sumenkov, Marina G. Smirnova y
Esita E. Ganaeva
The modern law-making process: structure and main problems
contract (Magradze, 2020). The law-making theory task is to nd out the
better decision to solve this problem.
4. Monitoring of relevant legal norms and acts. This part deals with the
control over legal norms issued depending on their objectives and tasks.
This is the prime part of the law-making science because law-making
solution monitoring is not systematic now. This leads the collisions between
some of legal acts of dierent levels as well as contradiction of some
legal norms against each other. The legal norms are often not geared to
perspective and long-term applications, many legal acts are inopportunely
changed and added that leads to their slackness, so those acts require to be
cancelled (Leino and Curtin, 2017; Mcnamara et al., 2019).
The normative legal background of the law-making legal science is
constituted by numerous legislative acts of Russian Federation and its
subjects which raises certain diculties for development of law-making
theory terms, categories and institutions, puts back the production of
sucient denitions to percept profoundly the processes associated with
production and adoption of the law-making solutions.
As we suppose, clamant necessity to develop the uniform legislative act
concerning the law-making process in form of Law-making Code containing
the General and Specic Parts has raised. Tolbert P & Stern R promoted the
same idea in their paper (Konasinghe, 2020; Umedov, 2021).
Conclusions
Thus, as Russian law papers analysis shows, structure of the law-making
science must include all processes of issuing legal norms and acts rather
than standard setting process only including validation of legal norm. The
quality and eectiveness of legal regulation are provided by its groundings
and necessity arisen from objective development of the public relationships
in the rst instance.
The quality of legal norms and acts issued should be surely provided
by the law-making subjects. However, if public relationships regulation
would not be scientically grounded i.e. would not resulted from the
objective needs then legal act issued, even issued in the best manner from
rule-making point of view, would never be eective and so deems to be
cancelled. Therefore, the law-making science should comprise all of four
structural elements listed above.
613
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 605-614
Conict of Interest
The authors conrm that the information provided in the article does
not contain a conict of interest.
Acknowledgement
This article was prepared with the nancial support of the Russian
Foundation for Basic Research and the Belgorod Region in the framework
of the scientic project No. 18-411-310002 “Organizational and Legal
Mechanisms for the Systematization of Legal Terminology in the Context of
Regional Legislative Activities”.
Bibliographic References
BESSON, Samantha; MARTÍ, José Luis. 2018. “Legitimate actors of
international law-making: towards a theory of international democratic
representation” In: Jurisprudence. Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 504-540.
BOBROVNYK, Svitlana V; SHEVCHENKO A. Ie; DIDYCH, Taras O;
KHODANOVYCH, Vitalii O; DEI, Maryna O. 2020. “Formal
Manifestation of Law Making as an Object of Methodological Strategy of
Modern Law Knowled” Vol. 9, No, 05, pp. 959–972. Available online. In:
http://ir.nusta.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/6470. Consultation
date: 28/12/2020.
GAVA, Roy; JAQUET, Julien M; SCIARINI, Pascal. 2021. “Legislating or
rubber-stamping? Assessing parliament’s inuence on law‐making
with text reuse” In: European Journal of Political Research. Vol. 60, No.
1, pp. 175-198.
KONASINGHE, Kokila. 2020. “NGOs as loudspeakers: Potential role of NGOs
in bridging the north-south gap in international environmental and
sustainable development law making process” In: Sustainability and
Law. Vol, 23, pp. 355-375.
KOZENKOVA, Tatyana A; ABALAKINA, Tatyana V; SULEYMANOV, Ziya E;
BANK, Sergey V; SOKOLNIKOVA, Olga B. 2021. “Customs and Logistics
Activity in Geopolitical and Economic Changes: Problems, Strategies,
and Risks” In: Frontier Information Technology and Systems Research
in Cooperative Economics, Springer, Cham. Vol. 316, pp. 1105-1115.
614
Mikhail B. Rumyantsev, Vladislav Yu. Turanin, Sergey Yu. Sumenkov, Marina G. Smirnova y
Esita E. Ganaeva
The modern law-making process: structure and main problems
LEINO, Päivi; CURTIN, Deirdre. 2017. “In search of transparency for EU law-
making: Trilogues on the cusp of dawn” In: Common market law review.
Vol. 54, No. 6, pp. 1673- 1712.
MAGRADZE, Tengiz. 2020. “Tax Administration In The Russian Federation:
Current Problems And Development Prospects” In: Colloquium-journal.
No. 5 (57).
MCNAMARA, Luke; QUILTER, Julia; HOGG, Russell; LOUGHNAN, Arlie;
DOUGLAS, Heather; BROWN, David; FARMER, Lindsay. 2019.
“Understanding processes of criminalisation: Insights from an Australian
study of criminal law-making” In: Criminology & Criminal Justice.
Available online. In: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1748895819868519.
Consultation date: 28/12/2020.
NEMIROVA, Gulzida I; SAVELYEVA, Tatiana I. 2020. “Signicance assessment
of the risk management system to improve the quality of customs service
provision” In: Economic Consultant. Vol. 3, pp. 42-52.
ROMANOVSKAYA, Elena V; ANDRYASHINA, Natalia S; KUZNETSOVA,
Svetlana N; SMIRNOVA, Zhanna V; IVONINA, Oksana G. 2020. “Digital
Technologies in Russia: Trends, Place and Role in Economy” In: Institute
of Scientic Communications Conference. Vol. 155, No. 45, pp. 344-351.
UMEDOV, Kadriddin Minhodzhidinovich. 2021. “A concept of operational
lawmaking technology” In: SHS Web of Conferences, EDP Sciences. Vol.
94, pp. 432-458.
WIDIATI, Ekawestri Prajwalita. 2018. “Ecient public participation in the
local law-making process” In: Yuridika. Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 389-401.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en julio de 2021, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.39 Nº 69
