The concept of the subject of legal regulation is, of no doubts, one of the defining ones in the theory of law, but despite this, discussions about its sense are still ongoing in scientific circles. A comprehensive analysis of the currently available scientific approach to the definition of the concept of “legal regulation”, as well as the definition of its subject implemented in main legal encyclopedias, gives grounds to assert a significant number of logical errors, as well as incorrect establishment of connections between the elements of the specified concept. In particular, the separation of two objects in legal regulation at the same time – the “object of legal regulation” and the “object of legal effect” – is considered quite controversial, given the fact that social relations are primary in relation to human behavior, which always occurs within and regarding already objectively existing social relations.

The purpose of this article is to establish an opinion that the activity of the governing body (the state, which creates legal norms) is aimed specifically at the behavior of people and transforms such behavior into rights and obligations within the framework of certain relations. At the same time, the object of legal regulation is not a separate social relationship, separate from others; but a social relationship in the context of its institutional interrelationships. The approach to legal regulation in each specific case depends on their specifics. The characteristics of the object constitute a necessary condition for the legal regulation of social relations. At the same time, certain specific characteristics of norms depend on the nature of social relations, and the independent character of a particular legal field emerges precisely from specific characteristics of norms. There are reasons to believe that the objective definition of the branch of law narrows to the subject of the legal norm, reflected in its disposition, but not to the “subject of legal regulation” in the sense of some legal abstraction.

Thus, the qualitative characterization of the object of the legal norm is one of the most important conditions for proper legal regulation, its adequacy, and therefore its effectiveness. Without a clear understanding of this, the problem of defining the subject of the law remains debatable, which has an extremely negative impact on the legislative process. Rulemaking, without dividing the subjects of legal regulation into more and less important, should nevertheless be oriented towards a certain level of generalization of social relations: constitutional, legislative and by-law.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Yushchyk O, Haluzi ta instytuty pravovoi systemy: mify i realnist (Krytychnyi narys) (Oriiany 2002) (in Ukrainian).

Encyclopaedias

2. Petryshyn O (holova redkol), Velyka ukrainska yurydychna entsyklopediia, t 3: Zahalna teoriia prava (Pravo 2017) (in Ukrainian).

3. Shemshuchenko Yu (red), Velykyi entsyklopedychnyi yurydychnyi slovnyk (2-he vyd, pererobl i dopovn, Iurydychna dumka 2012) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

4. Tepliuk M, ‘Nova redaktsiia Konstytutsii i problemy konstytutsiinoi protsedury’ (2014) 7 Pravo Ukrainy 118 (in Ukrainian).

Theses

5. Yushchyk O, ‘Sportyvne pravo: teoretyko-pravovyi analiz, poniattia, formuvannia v natsionalnii pravovii systemi’ (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2020) (in Ukrainian).