Judicial reform of Alexander II and its historical and legal significance for the Russian constitutional system

Introduction. The article is devoted to the study of a number of historical and legal problems related to the evaluation of the results of the judicial reform of Alexander II (the second half of the 19th century). Considering whether the experience of this reform is applicable to the constitutional system of modern Russia, the author believes that although the Emperor Alexander II did not risk to make full-scale constitutional changes and octroy the constitution, his reforms as a whole and systemic unity constituted a fundamentally new state pattern, which, while preserving the principle of autocracy and a number of other key features of unlimited monarchy, demonstrated significantly updated state-legal forms of organization and activities of the public authority. Despite all the attractiveness of Alexander II’s plans, we cannot say today that they are really necessary for modern Russia in their completeness and authenticity, but what is very important for the modern theoretical and methodological assessment of the judicial reform is the pragmatism of the public administration of the second half of the 19th century. It preferred the path of democratization first of the judicial system and local (zemstvo) self-government, and only then, if it was necessary at all for the relevant historical and legal conditions of the Russian statehood development of period in question, constitutionalization of popular representation, universal and equal elections, multiparty system, separation of powers and supremacy of human rights. Methods. The work used a set of methods, which are developed and tested by historical and legal science and the theory of state and law. The methods of analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, dialectical approach, method of comparative jurisprudence were especially actively used. Results. The author proves that the existing law enforcement system in modern Russia is incomplete, imperfect and should not be subjected to theoretical and methodological idealization in this regard. Besides, judicial activity, prosecutorial, investigative and police practices need further humanization based on the requirements of constitutional principles and norms. Partial use of the experience of judicial reform of the second half of the 19th century, especially in the context of the institutionalization of jury trials, could contribute significantly in achieving this goal.