The institution of representation gives rise to a key problem for the modern concept of democracy – between nominal holders of power and absolute rulers, because power, in the end, cannot be anything other than the exercise of power. Accordingly, the holding of free elections in itself cannot be a reliable criterion of true democracy, since the next no less critical and challenging problem arises on the way of its practical implementation – by what means and means it is necessary to increase the influence of the people on the exercise of power formed on behalf of the people and exercised about the people.The inalienability of popular sovereignty excludes the understanding of the people’s constituent power as a one-time act, after which the people allegedly lose their sovereignty, as the concept of “people’s democracy” prevailing in the countries of the former socialist camp actually allowed. Therefore, no one, including the state, can usurp popular sovereignty. The latter provision of the Constitution of Ukraine is one of the general principles of the constitutional system of Ukraine, which are subject to increased constitutional protection. It is not legitimate to limit democracy because it is supposedly only capable of giving the people the opportunity to change their rulers through general elections periodically.The formation of the structure of the legal regime, as well as the technology of introducing legal regimes, should be based on the principles of the rule of law, legality, expediency, and reasonableness, since otherwise the introduction of restrictions and obligations may cause rejection in society and cause socio-political cataclysms.In general, the advantage of legal regimes over other means of legal policy is the comprehensive solution of important constitutional and legal policy tasks.
V. I. Bakun (Sat,) studied this question.