Inviolability of the home and the inadmissibility of its arbitrary...

Article 3. Inviolability of the home and the inadmissibility of its arbitrary deprivation

1. The home is inviolable.

2. No one has the right to enter the dwelling without the consent of citizens residing therein legally, except in the cases provided for by this Code and in cases provided for by other federal law and in the order or on the basis of a judicial decision.

3. Penetration into a dwelling without the consent of citizens residing on it on a legal basis is allowed in cases and in the manner prescribed by federal law, only in order to save the lives of citizens and (or) their property, ensure their personal safety or public safety in emergency situations, natural disasters , disasters, mass disorders or other extraordinary circumstances, as well as for the purpose of detaining persons suspected of committing a crime, suppressing committed crimes or establishing Lenia circumstances of the crime or accident happened.

4. No one can be evicted from the home or limited in the nature of the use of the dwelling, including the right to receive public services, except on the grounds and in the manner provided by this Code, other federal laws.

1. The article is based on two articles of the Constitution: Art. 25 and art. 40 (Part 1). Article 25 establishes that the home is inviolable. No one has the right to enter the dwelling against the will of the persons residing therein, except in cases stipulated by federal law or on the basis of a court decision. According to Part 1 of Art. 40 everyone has the right to a dwelling. No one can be arbitrarily deprived of a home.

2. In part 3 of the commented article, cases are mentioned where penetration of other citizens into the dwelling is possible in addition to the will of the persons residing in it (workers in the housing and communal services, rescuers, police officers, etc.). Unfortunately, the specific legal mechanism of this penetration not established, i.e. It is not clear who (which bodies and individuals) on the basis of which documents have the right to penetrate into it against the will of citizens living in the dwelling. Such uncertainty can lead to numerous violations of housing rights of citizens, and therefore this issue should be regulated by the relevant federal laws. It should be noted that for a number of cases, for example, for penetration of police officers into a dwelling, there are specific norms in a special federal law relating to the activities of police officers. See also the introductory article.

3. It seems that part 4 of the article is incorrectly formulated in relation to Part 1 of Art. 40 of the Constitution. The Constitution says that no one can be arbitrarily deprived of a home. Part 4 deals not only with eviction from the home on certain grounds and in accordance with the established procedure, but also with restrictions on the right to use the dwelling (including the use of communal services). Such restrictions are possible only in accordance with the United States LC and other federal laws. In this article, the constitutional principle of the inadmissibility of arbitrary deprivation of dwelling is linked only with eviction from the home. At the same time, for example, a citizen may be deprived of the right to housing, if without the decision of the authorized bodies the residential building in which he lives is demolished. The commented part has basically a reference character, therefore the corresponding norms are available in the US LC itself (for example, evictions are dealt with in Articles 84 - 91), as well as in other federal laws.

In addition, it should be borne in mind that in some cases this issue should not be linked with the right of citizens to housing. For example, Art. 29 LC of the United States provides for the sale of a dwelling, owned by, from a public auction on the suit of a local government and on the basis of a judicial decision. This measure is provided for citizens who have made unauthorized reconstruction and (or) unauthorized alteration of living quarters. If a citizen resided in this room, then it may be about depriving the right to housing. And if he did not live in it (had another home), then - about depriving (forcible withdrawal) of property (housing).

See also an introductory article on this issue.

thematic pictures

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)