Introduction: The Paradoxes of Marginality

Models of Marginality in the Historical-Theoretical and Political-Legal Contexts

“…The innovation that distinguishes the modern legal model of marginality in Russia from its Soviet counterpart embraces: recognition of the objective nature of delinquency in general and organized professional crime in particular Bradatan & Craiutu, 2012;Romashov & Bryleva, 2019;Ainoutdinova & Ainoutdinova, 2019;Romashov et al, 2017); recognition of the fact of latent delinquency is associated with referring to a marginal group of persons involved in illegal relations, however, for a number of reasons, not brought to legal responsibility for the crimes committed (Popova, 2000;Feofanov, 1992;Romashov & Bryleva, 2019;Ainoutdinova & Ainoutdinova, 2019); presence of uncertainty, gaps and defects of law, "illegal" norms and acts, etc. (Billson, 1988;Bradatan & Craiutu, 2012;Khazieva et al, 2019;Davletgildeev & Klimovskaya, 2019); mismatch of goals and objectives, methods, and mechanisms of legislative regulations at the international, federal and regional levels, etc. (Popova, 2000;Khazieva et al, 2019;Feofanov, 1992;Romashov & Bryleva, 2019).…”

“…Understanding of marginality in modern Russia is pluralistic in nature, since: a) it is not reduced only to the "inherited paradigm" of marginalism (as a stable socially negative phenomenon) of the Soviet period (Popova, 2000); b) it is carried out within the framework of the dualistic paradigm of the worldview, according to which the normativity and deviance of law are correlated as its truth and falsity (Stepanenko, 2014); c) the state as an object of marginalization is a combination of three semantic images: a country / territory, a people / nation, an apparatus of public power / state bureaucracy, which in synergy form ideas about a particular state, its reputation and authority (Sainakov, 2013;Khazieva et al, 2019); d) the state-country's comprehension of marginality boils down to recognition of possibility to change the results of the "division of the world" that emerged as a result of World War II (Bradatan and Craiutu, 2012;Stepanenko, 2014); e) in relation to the state-as-people, the problem of marginalization is actualized in connection with legal and illegal migration; though, in reality, migrants act as bearers of a legal status that is not much different Vol. 38 Nº Especial (1era parte 2020): 198-207 from that of any foreigners (Romashov and Bryleva, 2019;Romashov et al, 2017;Davletgildeev and Klimovskaya, 2019).…”

“…To consider the mechanism of the legal assessment of marginality, a complex method of historical-theoretical and intersectoral synthesis was used. This allowed combining scientific achievements of foreign and domestic historical-theoretical jurisprudence and other branches of law (Bradatan & Craiutu, 2012;Sainakov, 2013;Feofanov, 1992).…”

“…In jurisprudence, this area of knowledge is studied in terms of the general legal theory of marginality, which has developed since the beginning of the 21st century. The foundations of this theoretical structure include the works of foreign (Park, 1928;Billson, 1988;Bradatan and Craiutu, 2012), as well Models of Marginality in the Historical-Theoretical and Political-Legal Contexts as Russian (Atoyan, 1993;Popova, 2000;Sainakov, 2013) philosophers, sociologists, lawyers, political scientists, historians and psychologists.…”