Contemporary Problems of Social Work Современные проблемы социальной работы academic journal

152
CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS OF SOCIAL WORK
Despite the fact that SROs are the non-profit organizations, they are limitedly engaged in 
property relations.
Methodology
During the study the authors relied upon general and private methods of cognition: 
historical, legal, formal-legal, comparative legal, sociological and others. The main method is 
a system-structural which helped to reveal the legal nature of self-regulatory organizations in 
connection with other phenomena, as well as the existing problems in this area.
The combination of legal, historical and comparative legal methods allowed us to identify 
specific impact of the historical conditions at the development of self-regulation in Russia, in 
particular the combination of the of private and public legal nature.
Formal legal method made it possible to analyze legal rules governing self-regulatory 
organizations activity describing features of self-regulatory organizations (SRO), attributing 
them to subjects of private and public law.
On the basis of the sociological method, suggestions and recommendations are based with 
respect to the specific information obtained from official sources, materials, periodicals, Internet 
resources, standards, legal-reference systems and the media the grounded conclusions were made.
Systemic-structural method provided the authors with the opportunity to review the self-
regulatory organizations as subjects of public and private law.
Results and discussion
During the research we came to the conclusion, that the self-regulatory organizations do 
function both as participants of social relations and as public regulators performing normative 
and control functions, thereby realizing private and public interests.
The conclusion is made on vesting on self-regulating organizations of the private-law legal 
personality, the contents of which are subjective rights and obligations inherent to the Russian 
non-profit organizations as subjects of rights, and the special rights and duties associated with 
their role in process of self-regulation, which are implemented as a result of participation in a 
discretionary relations in certain limits provided by legislation.
Thus, we came to conclusion about SRO’s mixed legal nature and its complex legal personality, 
containing mutually conditioned public-legal competence and civil legal personality.
Ambiguous legal nature of self-regulatory organizations has generated a lot of debate in the 
scientific community.
So, O.A. Yastrebov had considered possible definition of self-regulatory organizations as the 
public subjects of law, because they, in his opinion, are empowered with some public powers 
as a result of outsourcing, i.e. the mechanism of excretion of certain activities outside the 
scope of authority of the executive branch through contracts with outside performers on a 
competitive basis [18].
A similar position is shared by A.M. Volkov. He considers that the transfer of such state 
powers as the development of standards and rules of professional or business activities, the 
supervision over compliance with the requirements of the specified standards and regulations 
by the members of self-regulatory organizations, the application of disciplinary measures 
against members of the self-regulatory organization, to self-regulatory organizations, are the 
signs of the legal entity of public law [19].
I.G. Zhurina, considering them as a kind of non-profit organizations, notes that they belong 
to the entities of public law in the case of the predominance in their activities of public goals, 
on the achievement of which, in her opinion, the will of the uniting persons should be directed, 
and the availability of a special order of creation [20].
In scientific literature one can find opinions about the SRO as a new legal form of legal 
entities, to refer such organizations to a special group of subjects – “self-regulating” created 
not for the regulation of solely private law relations, because there are no public functions that 
can be transferred to the individuals in this area, and so forth.

---

153
VOLUME 2, No. 1, 2016
As noted Sitdikova L.B., in national civil law until the legal fixation of the concept of “self-
regulatory organization”, the term “self-regulation” was not defined as a category of private law, 
and it has been used only to define the role of civil law as the regulator [15].
The scientific position of scientists that recognize their dual nature seems fair. So, A.V. 
Basova believes that, on the one hand, self-regulatory organizations are the private-law 
associations of entrepreneurs consolidating professional interests. And on the other hand, they 
“perform public functions of regulation and control over business activities of its members” [1].
To determine the legal status of SROs in Russia, one should look at their socio-legal nature. 
In our view, it consists of the following.
1.  Self-regulatory organizations create regulators of social relations (samples and measures 
of behavior) in the form of a set of standards and rules, sanctions, mandatory for participators 
in professional and business activity.
2.  SRO by creating samples and measures of behavior, stand as the element of the mechanism 
of social and legal regulation. For this self-regulatory organizations are vested with supervisory 
functions and funds to implement them. in particular, they give “permission” to conduct 
certain activities in form of tolerances, accreditations, produce membership of self-regulatory 
organization, they form and use compensation fund, check the activities of its members, apply 
disciplinary responsibility in case of violations, and so on.
Self-regulatory organizations participate in ordering, stabilization of social relations arising 
in connection with the observance of the SRO members of the applicable laws, including rules 
that determine the parameters for the conduct by them of entrepreneurial or professional 
activity.
Moreover, self-regulatory organizations organize relationships between their members 
and the consumers of their goods, works and services. According to S.B. Tretyakova these 
relationships are viewed as “...the relationship between members of the SRO and the self-
regulatory organization itself” [10; 17].
3.  Since the self-regulatory organizations are involved in the ordering of social relations, 
they aim to meet the interests of the subjects, which are involved in them. The analysis of the 
basic rights, duties and functions of SROs provided for in article 6 of the Law on self-regulating 
organizations, allows making a conclusion on the powers they possess.
In addition to the possibility of the regulation of the professional entrepreneurship activity 
of its members, which serves as the means of realizing public (public) interest, and consists 
of the regulation of social relations in a particular field, self-regulatory organizations also 
represent the interests of its members in their relations with public authorities of the Russian 
Federation, public authorities of subjects of the Russian Federation and bodies of local self-
government, that violate the rights and legitimate interests of the self-regulatory organization, 
its member or threaten such violation, and so on.
Thus, self-regulatory organizations are, on the one hand, participants of the public relations, 
and, on the other, they regulate certain social relations in the sphere of professional and 
entrepreneurial activities, which are defined by law, performing normative (create regulators) 
and controlling functions. In addition, the Russian self-regulatory organizations implement 
both private and public interests.
The manifestation of the dual nature of SROs is reflected in the legislation of Russia. Their 
private character is determined, for example, by the fact that the self-regulatory organization – 
are the collective subjects of law, created in the form of a legal entity. In accordance with 
paragraph 3 of article 3 of the Law on self-regulating organizations, they are non-profit 
organizations which are registered in the Unified state register of legal entities by decision of 
the relevant territorial administration of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Federation.
The definition of collective subject of law, created in the form of a legal entity, as the 
participant of property relations is established in Russian law (article 48 of the civil code), as 

---