in Ukraine candidate's thesis, covering problem of constitutionally legal liability LR Nalivayko, which defines constitutionally legal liability as the type of social and legal responsibility, existing in the sphere of constitutionally-legal relations, provided by norms of the constitutional law, characterized by the specific number of subjects, mechanism of realization and sanctions, revealing in forced application of ways of influence for illegal deed (retrospective aspect) and in responsible condition of the obliged subject (positive aspect), acting as the most important guarantee of realization and protection of the Constitution [12]. position of double aspect of constitutionally legal liability is supported by the well-known domestic scientists-jurists VF Pogorelko and V.L. Fedorenko. In their opinion, constitutionally legal liability should be defined as the independent type of legal responsibility, which assumes appropriate and conscientious performance by the subjects of the constitutional law of their duties (the positive aspect) or coming of negative consequences or undesirable change of constitutionally legal status for these subject for violation of norms of the working constitutional law (negative aspect) [13]. debating on cause of legal nature and contents of constitutionally legal liability, we shall note that under all differences of definitional design of double aspect constitutionally legal liability and variety in interpretation of the sense and contents of positive responsibility, the named points of view are united in the uniform conceptual position by desire to find the equal equivalent, legal explanation of lexical phenomenon, expressed in abstract enough notions responsibility for ensured affair raquo ;, approach with responsibility raquo ;, to allocate with responsibility raquo ;, legal duty etc. lingual terms actually reflect objective need of society to see in responsibility not only the synonym of the punishment, but the facilitator of creative and simultaneously lawful constitutional behaviour. However it is necessary to agree with the point of view of MA Krasnov, according to whom, in the proposed by these authors theoretical design there is lost the qualitative specifics of category of responsibility. Essentially it is simply substituted by other categories (duty, reporting, positive attitude), each of which has its own purpose and contents. Consequently, positive responsibility loses practical sense [14]. Thereby, wholly justified desire by means of responsibility to stimulate the mediated by the law social-useful activity is not filled with practical sense, makes unclear the holistic matter of constitutionally legal liability. amorphness of the concept of double aspect responsibility has caused the critics even on the part of those, who acknowledge positive responsibility. Their critics present itself the logical end of the uniform notion of responsibility. The bright representative of this trend has become OE Leist, who considered that creative work (first of all management) is impossible under the threat of sanctions, as fear constrains the initiative [15]. think that estimation of this or that position depends mainly on what is put in understanding of legal responsibility in general. If to follow the opinions of the majority of scientists-jurists, who consider legal responsibility solely as responsibility for the past illegal behaviour, the collation within the framework of constitutionally legal liability of elements of retrospective and so called positive responsibility is meaningless since in this case different notions are meant. to follow the position of those who define legal responsibility more broadly, distinguishing: 1) responsibility for past (the retrospective aspect); 2) responsibility in the sense of responsible behaviour, account abilities, legal competence (active or positive aspect), the above mentioned collation of such elements of constitutionally legal liability, as retrospective and positive responsibility is, of course, justified, however herewith there is lost the main sense of discourses about constitutionally legal liability as one of types of legal responsibility since in this case, eventually, everything reduces to the fact that in the constitutional law legal responsibility emerges laquo ; mainly in its general, positive importance - as responsible attitude of the person to the duties, allocated on by the law, correct, conscientious, successful, efficient performance, effective state and public control over such performance of the duties [16]. the lawyers, even those who support broad understanding of legal responsibility, the main interest from the point of view of constitutionally legal liability is caused by its retrospective aspect, for the sake of which, there has been put the question about existence of constitutional-legal (state-legal, constitutional) liability as one of ty...
