Ministry of education and science of the republic of tajikistan

§ 4. Restrictive and pervasive interpretation.

With a restrictive interpretation, the content of the rule of law is already its textual expression. In the case of a widespread interpretation, the content (meaning) of the interpreted norm is broader than its textual expression. The list of cases that require a broad interpretation is often accompanied by the expressions", etc.” , "and others". But such an interpretation is possible without specifying it in the law. When speaking about the common interpretation, it is necessary to distinguish this concept from the concept of an extended interpretation of the law. The broad interpretation of the law is its extension to cases that are not covered by the meaning of the rule of law and which the legislator, when creating the law, did not mean. Broad interpretation is the process of creating a new legal norm. It is no longer, strictly speaking, an interpretation. Restrictive and pervasive types of interpretation are used as an exception when the idea of the legislator has not been adequately embodied in the text of the normative act (or the text becomes outdated due to the development of public relations). These types of interpretation may arise when the legislator uses a term or expression of a broader or narrower scope than the scope of the concept he had in mind. A broad or restrictive interpretation may follow from the consistency of the rules of law. These types of interpretation cannot be applied if this leads to a deterioration of the legal status of the person against whom the act of applying the legal norm is issued. It is also not allowed: a broad interpretation of exhaustive lists; a restrictive interpretation of incomplete lists; a broad interpretation of sanctions; a broad interpretation of provisions that constitute an exception to the general rule; a broad or restrictive interpretation of terms defined by the legal definition. The limit of the restrictive and expansive interpretation is the text of the law in its full logical scope.

We have come to the conclusion that a literal, restrictive, and pervasive interpretation is the result of applying a particular interpretation technique. Usually, the rules of law are interpreted literally (adequately). Restrictive and pervasive interpretation is applied when the content (meaning) of the interpreted norm and its textual expression do not coincide, which is an exception to the general rule. Often these types of interpretation are the result of imperfect legislation, the presence of gaps in it, unclear wording, etc. But sometimes the legislator allows this possibility intentionally. The correct application of a restrictive and pervasive interpretation in these cases helps to establish the true will of the legislator.