CC BY
54PROBLEMS OF LAW-MAKING IN THE AREA OF TECHNICAL REGULATION
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14420/en.2013.6.8
Krasavin Aleksandr Vadimovich, Candidate in Engineering Science, Master of Law, Deputy Head of Department of the Federal Autonomous Establishment the Chief Directorate of State Expert Examination of Russia, e-mail: a-krasavin@mail.ru.
The article states that the lack of conformity between the systems of norm setting, standardization, certification, control and inspection and modern demands and market relations is one of the key factors hindering the development of the economy of the Russian Federation. On the basis of an analysis of the national system of technical rate setting, including its merits and demerits, the author considers the problems and prospects of a reform of the system of setting statutory requirements, an evaluation of conformity and confirmation of conformity, and the formation of a legal basis for a general national legal regime of technical regulation (stipulated by the adoption in 2003 of Federal Law No 184-FZ “On Technical Regulation”). The problems are reflected in the application of the technical regulations and directives of other countries and of international, foreign and provisional national standards in the reform of the technical regulation system of Russia. The success of the reform of the technical regulation system, in the author's opinion, must be ensured by the application of achievements of national jurisprudence, and by the development of a socio-technical law. technical regulation, technical regulation system, system of technical rate setting, technical barriers in trade, international standardization, technical rate setting and standardization, socio-technical law, economy of Russia, global economic space.
In recent years, due to the globalization of economic relationships, there has been active modernization of legislation in the field of technical regulations and conformity assessment. As a result of this activity, at the beginning of the 21st century the international community has developed a system of technical regulation, which is based on the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade and international standards.
Russia’s entry into the market and its integration into the world economy caused an urgent need for the early establishment in the country of a national system of technical regulation, harmonized with the requirements of the
Abstract.
Keywords:
international documents in this field. The President and the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation repeatedly spoke about significance of this problem, pointing to the paramount importance and priority of work aimed at bringing the system of technical regulation into a condition corresponding to the needs of society and the interests of the state1.
Today, one can admit that one of the key factors hampering economic development in the Russian Federation is the discrepancy between the systems of regulation, standardization, certification, control and supervision and contemporary needs and market relationships. Russia’s economy has actually entered the market, but the system of technical regulation is still the same system that was formed in the era of the planned economy, total control, economic deficit and lack of competition.
The national system of state technical regulation evolved from the 1930s and, at the time of the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Federation had one of the best systems in the world for technical regulation - mandatory requirements were secured by departmental regulations and normative technical documents. However, the main drawback was the lack of an enforcement mechanism in market conditions.
Global changes in industry began in 2003 with the Federal Law No. 184-FZ “On technical regulation”, which marked the beginning of a new phase of existence of technical and legal norms and laid the “grounds of the legal foundation of technical regulation”2. It was necessary to make a radical change to the approaches to and evaluation of technical regulation, to determine the place of technical regulation in the overall mechanism of legal regulation. The law had to lay the foundations for a radical reform of the whole system of establishing mandatory requirements and assessing and confirming conformity, as well forming the legal basis for a general national and legal regime for technical regulation.
The law established a reform period of seven years, during which, first, a methodological framework for technical regulation was to be formed, and, second, law-makers were to prepare and adopt by-laws to ensure compliance with the requirements of this law.
Unfortunately, neither the first nor the second aim was properly realized. The root cause of all the difficulties and problems encountered in the reform of the system of technical regulation was the methodological unpreparedness, and the failure to provide the necessary fundamental research.
It should be noted that, in international legal practice, the term “technical regulation” in its literal wording is almost never used. In the norm-setting practices of international organizations and the national legislation of different countries terms such as “technical barriers to trade”, “international standardization” or “standardization”, or “technical regulation and standardization” are used more
1 Meeting of the Commission on modernization and technological development of economy of Russia. President of Russia. URL: http://state.kremlin.ru/commission/20/news/6674.
2 Tereshchenko L.K., Tikhomirov Yu.A., Khabrieva T.Y. The legal concept of technical regulation // Journal of Russian Law. 2006. No. 9. P. 3.
often as synonyms for the term “technical regulation”. Most domestic lawyers are convinced that all these terms have the same meaning and that they describe the legal regime that creates favourable conditions for the development of international trade by regulating the relationships arising in connection with the adoption of technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures1.
Despite some statements made by senior officials about emerging success stories associated with the introduction of a growing number of technical regulations, the reform of technical regulation in Russia has made no obvious progress. To date there is no mutual understanding between lawyers, officials and technical experts on many critical issues in the industry under reform.
Today it is extremely important to find the agreed positions of all interested parties on major issues of methodological significance in reforming and building a new system of technical regulation.
Turning to the history of the development of the system of state regulation, we recall that the Decree of the People's Commissars of the USSR of June 15, 1932 No. 928 was considered necessary for the pan-Union Committee on Standardization to move from the development of a large number of small standards to the main technical and production problems of the national economy. In order to strengthen departmental work on standardization, committees on standardization were created by Commissariat Committees. This situation continued until the adoption of the Decree of the USSR Council of Ministers on April 21, 1988, No. 489, “On restructuring activities and organizational structure of the USSR State Committee on Standards”, in accordance with which industry normative technical documents were abolished, and another, two-tier, system of specifications and technical documentation, which included state (republic) standards and technical specifications, was established.
The core of the two-tier system of normative and technical documentation system adopted in 1988 comprised three categories of standards (state, republic, and industry) that were mandatory for the relevant enterprises, as they were approved by government bodies. Enterprises could also set requirements for their products only when such requirements had not been established by higher authorities. The system for monitoring compliance with the requirements that were established, based on the principles of centralized state control over the implementation of and compliance with the standards, conformed to this regulatory documentation system.
As a result, the legal and regulatory framework for technical regulation that existed in Russia at the end of the twentieth century did not meet the requirements of scientific and technical progress and represented a “fragmented set of regulations, because it was evolved over the years on the basis of inconsistent rulemaking of ministries and departments”2. Therefore, there was a need to
1 Ioyrysh A.I., Terentyev V.G., Chopornyak A.B., Reform of technical regulation in international law aspect // State and Law. 2007. No. 6. - P. 31.
2 Nesterov A.V. On technical regulation in Russia // State and Law. 2009. No. 8. - P. 93.
organize and create a unified system of technical regulation in Russia.
At the current time, there are different views on the meaning of the term “system of technical regulation”, and this term is the backbone of this field of legislation. In the law “On Technical Regulation”, there is no such concept as the system of technical regulation, and this allows the various experts to interpret it in their own way, despite the fact that the introduction of a new term is exclusively the prerogative of lawmakers. The lack of a clear understanding of basic concepts, the considerable efforts of opponents of reform, the complexity of the tasks, and other factors mean that “a lot of methodological and technical errors that must be corrected” still remain in the legislation on technical regulation1.
Many of those working in the field of technical regulation believe that drastic measures are needed to change the course of reform. Unfortunately, the measures proposed by the latest amendments to the legislation on technical regulation cannot be described as drastic. If they were aimed at the application of the requirements of technical regulations and directives of other countries, as well as international, foreign and preliminary national standards, they could, in principle, be useful, but they are not useful in today’s environment. The reform is stagnating; the coming of the regulations into force does not have any real impact on business or the consumer. Initially, it is necessary to improve the quality of the regulations and to establish a procedure for the introduction of such documents, and only then can the bar of technical regulations and standards be raised to the international level.
It is essential to provide a set of measures to ensure the effective implementation of those regulations that have already been adopted. All activities necessary for their entry into force must be performed, responsibility must be established and a mechanism for the monitoring and supervision of their observance must be worked out. Only these actions will allow respect for technical regulations to return, and this is a necessary platform for further action.
Besides, every technical regulation should be objectively necessary to address safety issues. Each one should be developed on the basis of the results of the record and analysis of actual cases of harm done to people or the economy from the use of specific products.
When determining the need for this or that technical regulation one must also consider that its introduction in practice is always a burden on businesses. It is necessary to carry out activities for the implementation of the requirements established by the regulation, to change designs, to replace technical documentation, to improve the organization of production and technology, to train specialists, etc. All this requires intellectual and material costs, and these costs are often considerable. Naturally, the costs can be justified only if the regulation reflects the interests of both producers and consumers, i.e. if it improves quality from the government’s point of view.
High quality technical regulations and high quality procedures for their
1 NesterovA.V. About the theory and practice of regulation // State and Law. 2008. No. 1. - P. 91-95.
entry into force should be the main goal today for the implementation of reform to technical regulation1.
However, an analysis of the technical regulations that have been adopted allows us to identify numerous deviations from the requirements of FZ (Federal Law) “On Technical Regulation”, such as:
- overcrowding with data on design solutions and execution;
- ignoring methodologies of assessing the risk of damage and identifying objects of technical regulation in setting minimum essential requirements;
- infringing the principle of the need to establish an exhaustive list of products and processes for which requirements are established;
- lack of adequate methods of conformity assessment for numerous norms,
etc.
All this is aggravated by a low level of legislative technique in drafting technical regulations. The regulations, as a rule, do not deal with such areas of legislative activity as establishing the rights of those who are subject to the law and determining their legal status; distributing rights and responsibilities; and securing the uniqueness of interpretation of requirements. In general, the formulation of the final and transitional provisions, including the designation of the order and timing of the introduction of the regulations and the list of the existing rules that are to be abolished, is unsatisfactory2.
In addition, in technical regulations there are many violations in the selection and formation of concepts and terms, and contradictions and ambiguities in how the regulations are interpreted. Even well-established and common terms are interpreted in different regulations in different ways.
Many experts in the field of technical regulation believe that, during the reform process, the person, as an object of relationships and rules, is given insufficient attention. After all, in principle, all regulatory requirements are addressed to human beings and their activities. Therefore, according to the Committee for Technical Regulation, Standardization and Conformity Assessment of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP), human activities and not industry should be the areas of technical regulation.
As international experience shows, the qualitative development of technical regulations cannot be achieved without a real consensus of all stakeholders and, to begin with, government, business and consumers must agree on decisions about the form of requirements for regulations and the form of assessments for conformity3. The leading foreign countries have developed corresponding approaches to the formation of the mechanisms of technical regulation. We have no such experience.
No less difficult a problem arises when choosing the forms of conformity assessment. The constitutional duty of the state is the protection of society, citizens,
1 Versan V.G., Technical regulations. Better fewer but better. // Standardization. 2010. No. 3. P. 23-26.
2 LotsmanovA.N. Technical law: About the system causes of the crisis features in the Russian technical reforms // Journal of Russian Law. 2008. No 8. P. 15-16.
3 Versan V.G. (note 6). P. 23-26.
the property of physical and legal persons, animals, plants and the environment from dangerous products. Businesses, in turn, make strong complaints about unreasonable barriers that limit the access of products to the market. Therefore, the mechanism of technical regulation must ensure, on the one hand, the safety of the life and health of the citizens, and, on the other, the free movement of goods within the country. It is necessary to find a balance between these two conflicting objectives.
The position of the majority of specialists in the sphere of technical regulation is to ensure today that the equilibrium point in the abovementioned balance for the measures taken should shift towards safety. The main problem in the formation of safety requirements and the assessment of compliance with the technical regulations is to find a consensus-based balance between what is the most appropriate, in terms of the solutions to our social and economic problems, and what can be done by most companies. This should be the main task for the developer of technical regulations, and this is what he has to justify at all stages in the process of his consideration, prior to the adoption by the legislator. Naturally, whether or not this balance is achieved should be the object of analysis for expert commissions on technical regulation and experts called by the legislator.
Finding the aforementioned balance largely depends on preparing a list of national standards and/or sets of rules that ensure compliance with regulatory requirements, and a list of national standards that contain rules and methods for research (tests) and measurement. These will create an objective basis for the formation of regulatory requirements.
Technical regulations adopted in the form of federal laws or decrees of the government of the Russian Federation would be established as standards, and this would imply the possibility of using them in litigation as a legal instrument. In order to achieve this, each statutory regulation must be accompanied by a conformity assessment. This condition is not always observed during the development of regulations, which reduces their legal quality.
It should also be taken into account that, unlike the methods of applying legal norms, the conformity assessment methods in technical regulations may include a number of technical procedures that are complicated to perform. However, for any legislation that is associated with normative instructions, the possibility of legal liability requires compliance with the important principle of the Federal Law “On Technical Regulation” that requires “unity of rules and methods of research (tests) and measurements during procedures of the mandatory conformity assessment and the unity of application of technical regulations, regardless of species or features of transactions” (Article 3).
In essence, this is about the principle of uniformity in the assessment of conformity, which is no less important than the principle of uniformity of measurements. The problem is important, but in the course of reform, unfortunately, it has not even been discussed. Thus, it is also necessary to take into account the fact that an established norm should be verifiable, that is, its feasibility should be proved in an empirically tested way.
Thus, the reform of such a key element of the system of technical regulation as conformity assessment does not meet a number of important methodological principles of the theory of law. This fact is exacerbated by the known backlog in our country of a variety, at the methodological level, of ways and areas of conformity assessment. The backlog, in the opinion of many of those working in the field of technical regulation, is quite significant and it is impossible to eliminate it by natural evolution within a reasonable time. There is a need for a hard technological approach1. Instead of this approach, there is fragmented work with individual tasks, and often with pseudo tasks that look quite natural in terms of building a new system of technical regulation but do not show proper coherence in the development of the individual elements of the system.
The reason for the lack of quality of technical regulations is that, in some cases, the bodies of state power ignore the views of those who are developing the regulations and the experts involved in the discussions. In accordance with the Law “On Technical Regulation”, expert committees for technical regulation conduct official reviews of draft technical regulations. A comparative analysis of their findings and the regulations that are adopted shows that fundamental changes are made to the regulations after the expert reviews, without consultation with the experts, and in some cases without consultation with the developers, meaning that expert opinion does not count. There is no constructive approach to recording the comments of interested parties in the public discussion process for draft technical regulations2. Scientists note3 that among the participants at discussions there is an absence of familiarity and skill in holding discussions. There is no search for truth, but a showdown, and the rejection of different perspectives. However, once the discussion is strengthened not by arguments, but by the power of the authorities, the consensus breaks down and, as a consequence, decisions on the content of technical regulations reflect neither balanced or national interests nor the interests of all the parties concerned. This can all be seen in the technical regulations that have been adopted.
The existing legislative rules related to technical regulation issues are not always consistent. This leads to a legal conflict in formulating the specific rules of technical regulations, because the developer of the regulation refers not to the standards of the Federal Law “On Technical Regulation”, but to other legislative acts that are in conflict with the standards of the Federal Law. This situation is aggravated by the fact that responsibility for failure to comply with standards of technical regulations is not fully stipulated in the current legislation.
There is currently no specialized professional executive body responsible for organizing national activities for technical regulation. The situation today is that several technical regulations can be applied to the same product. This totally contradicts the fundamental idea of the technical regulation, that it concentrates
1 LotsmanovA.N. (note 7). P. 17.
2 Versan V.G., Krakov, I.Z., AronovA.V. Crisis and current problems of technical regulation // Industrial Policy in the Russian Federation. 2009. No 9. - P. 23.
3 Versan V.G. (note 6). - P. 23-26.
all safety requirements in a single regulatory document1. This situation can lead to serious systemic consequences. In order for a supplier of products to enter the market, he will now need to carry out conformity assessment under different certification bodies (according to the stipulated regulations) and comply with different requirements. In addition, state control (supervision) over the observance of the technical regulations will be implemented by different agencies, in accordance with the stipulated regulations, without proper coordination, because coordination is not specified by the regulations. Therefore, instead of the administrative barriers being reduced, new ones have been created. A possible way out of this situation is associated with the formation of a single coordinating centre, which would be responsible for all the problems of technical regulations, and a single accreditation body. This would allow certification bodies capable of carrying out the conformity assessment on all requirements related to a specific product to be accredited and would thus avoid unnecessary pressure on business.
Some experts in the field of technical regulation believe that a holistic view should be taken of what should be the result of the reform, which should be the European model, adapted to Russian conditions. This would be expedient, they say, because Russia has announced its intention to build a common economic space with the European Union. However, the expert analysis on technical regulation conducted by the Committee of the RSPP shows very significant differences between the European model and the system that is now being built in the course of reform. It may be noted that there are fundamental differences because the Europeans, in shaping the regulatory space, walk away from the objects of protection (human beings or the environment) towards the sources of danger (the techno-sphere), and for us, in contrast, the creation of the regulatory space moves from the sources of danger to the objects of protection. In practical terms this threatens to lead to countless repetitions, contradictions and inconsistencies2.
There are serious shortcomings in the organization and administration of technical regulations. From the standpoint of the actual introduction of the rules, the presence of the rules without a whole complex of accompanying documents does not make sense. In addition to the list of national standards and sets of codes that must be attached to technical regulations, it is also necessary promptly to form an infrastructure for performing works on mandatory conformation.
Regarding the problem of providing quality in technical regulations, it should be noted that the quality of technical regulations in Kazakhstan and Belarus and of European directives, so far as legal characteristics are concerned, does not exceed that of similar Russian documents. European directives are really of a high standard and have been tested over time. But that is not the case. The main problem of their use is that technical regulations and directives reflect the national interests of the country and are determined by the level of scientific and
1 Versan V.G., KrakovI.Z., AronovA.V. (note 10).- P. 23.
2 LotsmanovA.N. (note 7). - P. 17.
technological development in the country, and the material and technical support available. Whether the technical regulations will respond to our interests is a question that requires deep analysis. All this is relevant to the implementation of the proposals on the use of international and foreign standards.
The main aim here is to ensure that the implementation will help to promote the interests of domestic enterprises and the whole of Russia at the international level. However, it should be taken into account that by implementing these standards we will simplify the flow of imported products into our market and may put our industry in a difficult position. Foreign manufacturers will be able to deliver goods directly to us, regardless of whether those goods reflect our needs and of whether our enterprises are producing similar products and may go bankrupt. Taking into account the fact that the competitiveness of the majority of our products today tends to be low, the consequences for businesses and the economy as a whole may be negative.
Thus, at the present time, there is an extremely worrying situation, related to the fact that the old model of legal regulation has been destroyed and a new one has not been built. As a result of the unquestioned legal policy and state control, certification and accreditation appear to be derived from the common administrative system.
Technical conditions have lost their legitimacy, while a new type of regulatory document relating to standards for organizations has not yet been properly formed. Departmental norm-setting has stopped functioning, and the subjects (objects) of licensing have been drastically reduced, but the scope of mandatory requirements is not yet determined.
Taken together, these facts create an imbalance in the legal space. In addition, as shown by studies conducted by the Committee of the RSPP on technical regulation, against the background of the numerous defects in the regulatory framework, there is a sharp weakening of management impact on the economy. Under the conditions of the total weakness of the regulatory base, Russia's entry into the world economy on a parity basis is impossible, regardless of any tricks in the management system1.
In order to find a successful solution to the abovementioned problems, there must be precise coordination between different agencies, using the experience of training and the introduction of technical regulations by specialists in this field, continuous monitoring and fast-paced actions to adjust the progress of reform.
Such work may be qualitatively and professionally performed by a duly empowered specialist body; to a certain extent this would eliminate the inconsistency and lack of coordination in the field of technical regulation in various branches of government.
The general conclusion from the above is that any efforts to reform the system of technical regulation without targeting a specific model (project, paradigm) will be extremely inefficient. One of the most common causes of deficiencies and
1 LotsmanovA.N. (note 7). P. 18.
difficulties in the course of the reform is an ignorance of the obvious fact that, together with the transition to the new system of technical regulation, an essentially new branch of law - namely, socio-technical law - must be formed. Therefore, the success of the reform cannot be secured without the involvement of a rich arsenal of theoretical and practical achievements of domestic jurisprudence. First of all, there must be a formation of norms and principles and a system of basic concepts in the new area of law that is being created. Ignoring this fact is one of the most important causes of problems in the reform of the system of technical regulation.
But, as is well-known, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step! Despite all the problems at this time in the field of technical regulations, there are positive signs as well. And today, it would be desirable to believe that, during the drafting of the technical regulations of the Customs Union and the technical regulations of the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC), the rich experience accumulated over the ten years that has been spent reforming the system of technical regulations will allow the same mistakes to be avoided.
References
1. Versan V.G., Technical regulations. Better Fewer, But Better // Standardization. 2010. No. 3. P. 23-26.
2. Versan V.G., Krakov I.Z., Aronov A.V. Crisis and current problems of technical regulation // Industrial Policy in the Russian Federation. 2009. No. 9. P. 19.
3. Meeting of the Commission on modernization and technological development of economy of Russia. President of Russia. URL: http://state. kremlin.ru/commission/20/news/6674.
4. Ioyrysh A.I., Terentyev V.G., Chopornyak A.B. Reform of technical regulation from the international law aspect // State and Law. 2007. No 6. P. 31.
5. Lotsmanov A.N. Technical law: About the system causes of the crisis features in the Russian technical reforms // Journal of Russian Law. 2008. No 8. P. 15-16.
6. Nesterov A.V. About the theory and practice of regulation // State and Law. 2008. No. 1. P. 91-95.
7. Nesterov A.V. On technical regulation in Russia // State and Law. 2009. No. 8. p. 93.
8. Tereshchenko L.K., Tikhomirov Yu.A., Khabrieva T.Y. The legal concept of technical regulation // Journal of Russian Law. 2006. No. 9. P. 3.
