The Limits of Legal Regulation of Military Relations

The paper deals with one of the key features of the regulation of legal relations in the military environment. Those are the detailed regulation of rights, responsibilities, the execution of assigned tasks and orders. The author sees the reasons for such legal expansion in the historical tradition, i.e. fostering obedience and discipline among military personnel, guidance assistance to inexperienced commanders for them to be able to fulfill the assigned duties, as well as controllability and the intention to unify military activities in various military formations. Dysfunctional manifestations of this management style are instilling the lack of independence in decision-making, the habit of relying on superior management for all matters, the loss of initiative by subordinates, the inability to work in a team, lack of immediate response to sudden changes in the situation or non-standard situations. During military operations, these shortcomings not only reduce the effectiveness of control but are also likely to result in prevailing enemy's will, defeat, and unjustified casualties. Using particular examples of excessive regulation, the author questions the need, limits and degree of detailed legal regulation in the military environment. The paper analyzes the cases of directive control of the German Army (Auftragstaktik) and the commander's model used in respect of the subordinates with no detailed orders, with the subordinates being free to choose means and methods to achieve their goals. As measures to improve the legal regulation of the domestic military administration, the paper proposes to eliminate the legal responsibility of military commanders for deviation from detailed orders in cases they take reasonable risk and do not violate legally protected interests. The study uses the methods of formal logic, i.e. comparison, description, classification, analysis, synthesis, etc., which made it possible to characterize the essence of the legal relations under consideration and compare them with the methods of legal regulation of the relevant labor relations.

1. Shundikov K. V. Decentralization as a Factor of Self-Organizational Processes Development in Legal Regulation. Law and State. 2019;1:146-155. (In Russ.).

2. Svechin A. A. Strategy. 2nd ed. Moscow: Voennyi vestnik Publ.; 1927. 263 p. (In Russ.).

3. Tolstik V. A. Legal Totalitarianism: a Law-Making Strategy or Movement due to Inertia. Juridical Techniques. 2015;9:759-763. (In Russ.).

4. Putilo N. V. Public Services: Between Doctrinal Understanding and Practice of Normative Consolidation (10 Years Later). Journal of Russian Law. 2017;8:81-92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12737/article_597714e850a8c3.10775309 (In Russ.).

5. Khitarova I. Yu. The Aesthetics of War. Studia Culturae. 2013;17:156-166. (In Russ.).

6. Lapin V. V. The Army of Russia as the Mechanism of Integration in the Empire. Petersburg Historical Journal. 2019;1:302-313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51255/2311-603X-2019-00021 (In Russ.).

7. Markin A. V. Criteria for Justifying the Commander’s Service Risk. Law in the Armed Forces – Military-Legal Review. 2009;2:67-70. (In Russ.).

8. Krivopalov A. A. The Ukrainian Campaign and the Development of New Operational Trends. Post-Soviet Issues. 2022;9(3):338-353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24975/2313-8920-2022-9-3-338-353 (In Russ.).

9. Il’in I. A. The General Doctrine of Law and the State. Moscow: AST Publ.; 2006. 510 p. (In Russ.).

10. Lapitsky M. I. The Banality of Evil or Evil of Stupidity. Russia XXI. 2009;1:62-91. (In Russ.).

11. Gimmelreikh O. V., Kozeletsky I. V. Management Activities in the Internal Affairs Bodies: Some Issues of Legal Regulation. Bulletin of the Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus. 2021;1:1418. (In Russ.).

12. Sinchenko G. Ch. Juridification and Performative Presumptions of Positive Law. Scientific Bulletin of the Omsk Academy of the MIA of Russia. 2010;2:15-19. (In Russ.).

13. Nekrasov V. N., Mezentseva E. E. Contradictions in the Management and Their Role in the Development Strategy of the Organization. State and Municipal Administration Scientific Notes. 2014;3:66-73. (In Russ.).

14. Liddel Hart B. H. Strategy The Indirect Approach. Moscow: Inostrannaya literatura Publ.; 1957. 534 p. (In Russ.).

15. Ukrainchenko Yu. V., Savchenko O. A., Ukrainchenko K. Yu. Conditions for Achieving Breakthrough in a Present-Day Battle. Science and Military Security. 2022;2:104-112. (In Russ.).

16. Sokolkov E. A. Psychological Characteristics of Risk Commander When Performing Service and Combat Missions. Humanities and Education in Siberia. 2014;3:73-84. (In Russ.).

17. Prokayev A. N., Mishkarev A. N. The Evolution of Anglo-Saxon and Prussian Models of Armed Forces Control. Voennaya Mysl’. 2022;6:128-136. (In Russ.).

18. Gunther M. J. Auftragstaktik: The Basis for Modern Military Command? Fort Leavenworth: School for Advanced Military Studies; 2012. 61 p.

19. Berezina E. A. Limits of the Legal Regulation of Public Relations: Problems of Understanding, Classification and Their Importance in the Mechanism of Legal Regulation. Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2020;15(4):4255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.113.4.042-055 (In Russ.).

20. Ponkin I. V. Defects of Legal Regulation. Law and Education. 2016;7:4-15. (In Russ.).

21. Duprier L. The State and the Role of Ministers in Prussia. The State and the Role of Chancellor in Germany. St. Petersburg: Delo Publ.; 1906. 175 p. (In Russ.).