inistrative, civil-legal. for constitutional depicts constitutionally legal sanctions are far from comply with criminal punishments for crimes and administrative sanctions, established for administrative offenses. Application of measures of constitutionally legal liability does not draw conviction or any state of punishment. Constitutional-legal sanctions are applied by broad number of authorized bodies and persons: bodies of legislative, executive, judicial authorities, local self management and officials. Criminal punishments are applied only by court; disciplinary sanctions are applied by bodies and officials authorized by disciplinary power. Measures of constitutionally legal liability can be applied by bodies and officials relatively of not subordinated and uncountable to them subjects of constitutional delict. Hereunder they differ from disciplinary measures, which are applied to workers and employees in the order of subordination of higher bodies and officials [7]. legal liability, as any other legal category, objectively requires its determination, definitional determination. At present in science of the constitutional law there is no uniform determination of the constitutionally legal liability. Variety of approaches is conditioned by difference in methodological approaches in study of this legal phenomena and absence of statutory -legal definition of constitutionally legal liability in legislation of majority of modern states. of all, the question is duality of estimation of constitutionally legal liability. Scientists, jurists, covering the problem of constitutionally legal liability, can be divided into two groups raquo ;: supporters of narrow understanding ie acknowledging only negative responsibility, and supporters of double aspect responsibility, disintegrating into positive and negative raquo ;. The sense of opposition of these two concepts is that the one acknowledges the possibility of constitutionally legal liability solely after offense (constitutional delict), the other comes from existence of responsibility before violation of the norm. Accordingly, some jurists see in responsibility manifestation of law-enforcement function, the others try to connect responsibility with regulative and even сstimulating functions of the law. clarity let s illustrate the above stated positions with some examples. Thus, B.A. Strashun emphasizes that constitutionally legal liability should be understood only as negative raquo ;. In his opinion, division of responsibility into positive and negative is nonsense, taking into account that practically the question is about quite miscellaneous things: one thing, when we speak of a number of problems and authorities, for which the official should be responsible, the other when - the person or the body is subjected to disadvantage consequences [8]. declaring about misrecognition of positive constitutionally legal liability, NM Kolosova, notes that such responsibility of authorities is possible, but it does not relate to legal liability and accordingly to constitutional liability. The supporters of positive constitutional liability, according to NM Kolosova, suppose that it exists if it is legislatively determined and the power is responsible before the people. In her opinion, it is not correct, since for becoming of constitutionally liability it is necessary to have violation of the principles and norms, fixing constitutional rights and duties, provided by sanctions. Considering this, she defines constitutional liability as the need of having disadvantage consequences for non-execution (improper execution) by the subjects of the law of their own constitutional duties and for abuse of their own constitutional rights [9]. s try to state briefly argumentation of the supporters of positive responsibility. The point of view concerning the double aspect of understanding of constitutionally legal liability is varied. In the opinion of integer of the number of lawyers, constitutionally legal liability should not be considered solely within the framework of narrow understanding - as application to the offender of sanctions of legal norm or application of measures of state enforcement. Thus, according to of Yu.P. Eremenko, the most important side of the positive aspect of constitutionally legal liability is expressed in account abilities, control [10]. V.F. Melashchenko, considering that in the sphere of constitutional relations there dominates positive responsibility, but retrospective plays the role of auxiliary (though far from secondary responsibility), considered retrospective responsibility, as responsibility for the past, and positive raquo ;, as responsible behaviour, responsible attitude of the person (the body) to the duties, appropriate performance of the duties, account ability, legal competence [11]. complex double aspect definition approach differs the position of the author of the first...
