 and for the sake of implementation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws, normative decrees of the President of the Russian Federation" Government may also issue directives having “normative” character.
Agencies may enact regulations through their general competency, but these are limited to the extent of the constitution and relevant codes. If these limits are not strictly defined, then the president may use agencies to get around the legislative process. Consequently, agencies may have their powers limited by statutes. The Civil Code purposely authorizes supplementary rules by “statute” rather than the broader term “legislation” which could encompass other secondary law.
Judicial decisions, judicial practice and explanations of supreme courts
Russia is a civil law country; and, strictly speaking, decisions rendered by courts are not binding on other courts. However, the lower courts generally follow the principles established by the supreme courts. Moreover, according to Art.304 of the Code of Procedure in Commercial Courts, the Supreme Commercial Court can set aside a decision of a lower court on the grounds that this decision contravenes uniformity in interpretation of law as established by case law. In practice, but not in theory, precedents of the higher courts are becoming an important Russian law.
Judicial explanations of law
The Russian Supreme Court have no authority to issue general “explanations” of the substantive law and procedural issues, absent a relevant "case or controversy" in front of them. Legal scholars also take part in these discussions, and the opinions of the judges and commentators are published and used as persuasive authority. This process is somewhat analogous to the discussion that scholars take in American Law Reports or in law reviews.[according to whom?] The judges and scholars may codify what is practice, or more importantly address new issues of law to the lower courts and instruct them how to interpret these issues. The texts of the explanations of the law are published, and cited by many courts. In contrast, only selected judicial opinions are published. It is not clear which explanations are binding to lower courts, as there is a tension between the Constitution and federal law versus guiding explanatory principles. Still, lower courts that ignore relevant explanations will probably get reversed.
Judicial review of laws for constitutionality by the constitutional court
Judicial Review allows courts to declare unconstitutional laws void. Constitutional Courts are therefore negative legislators. The interpretations of the constitution in the decisions of the Constitutional Court are also authoritative and binding on the political branches. The ordinary or lower courts may also apply judicial review. Courts of general jurisdiction may decline to apply (1) any law that violates the Constitution and (2) any normative regulations, in particular subordinate regulations that contravene statutes. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has jurisdiction to determine the constitutionality of regulations issued by government agencies. The Supreme Court has held that lower courts must evaluate the contents of applicable laws or other normative acts for their conformity to the constitution, and to apply the constitution where they conflict.
USSR legislation fills gaps as the new system is being put in place, and is purely transitional until the Russian parliament can add new laws. It cannot contradict legislative acts of RF.
Legal consciousness, natural law, good faith and general principles
Judges don’t rely on natural law, but rather legal positivism combined with general principles of law. They may rely on “the requirements of good faith, reasonableness, and justice since Civil Code and other codes tell specific principles within the code. Other principles are equity and fairness, general principles of law, etc.
The Russian Civil Code explicitly mentions custom as a separate source of law. Traditions may establish rules of decision where there is no dispositive langu