In the age of political and legal instability, the concept, content and significance of a citizen's legal capacity are the theoretical basis of any legal relations and legal institutions. Every modern person needs to know what rights he has from birth and what responsibilities are assigned to him.
What is the difference between “legal capacity” and “legal capacity”?
That is why people as subjects of legal relations are fully characterized by two concepts - legal capacity and legal capacity of citizens. The content of these categories is often mistakenly equated with each other. Legal capacity is the ability of a person to have civil rights and responsibilities. Legal capacity, in contrast to the previous term, implies the ability of a citizen to give a report in his actions, acquire certain civil rights, and take on specific obligations.
If citizens are vested with legal capacity from the moment they are born and own it until death, then legal capacity arises only when a person reaches a certain age. In accordance with the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, this term is also identified with transaction capacity and tort - the ability to independently conclude transactions and bear property responsibility.
The concept of civil legal capacity of citizens
The content of civil legal capacity forms those property and personal non-property rights and obligations that a citizen, according to the law, may possess. In other words, its content is not the rights themselves, but the ability to have them. The emergence of the ability to have rights and obligations is associated with the appearance of a person in the world, and its cessation is associated with death. It is impossible to take legal capacity from a citizen throughout life, since it does not have age restrictions and everyone has it, regardless of their state of health.
At the same time, accepting legal capacity as a natural human right (to hear, see, eat, etc.) would be incorrect, since it is given not by nature, but by the legal field of a state. Today it is impossible to find a citizen who does not have legal capacity, which cannot be said about the times of the slave system.
How can a person use legal capacity?
Meanwhile, it should be understood that being competent does not mean having the actual ability to apply specific rights and obligations, and the content of the legal capacity of citizens is the basis and prerequisite for possessing them. At the legislative level, the right of every citizen to own a multitude of property rights and non-property rights is fixed.
From this it is not difficult to draw the following conclusion: to exercise the legal capacity available from birth, it is enough to acquire subjective rights. But their volume will already depend on the natural laws of any society: education, vocational guidance, education, wealth, preferences, morality and aspirations.
Elements of legal capacity: rights and obligations
In other words, the content of the legal capacity of citizens can be called not specific personal and property rights, but the ability to own and bear the corresponding obligations. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides a basic list of rights whose potential or actual owners may be Russian citizens:
- ownership right as a basis for ownership of property;
- inheritance and testamentary rights;
- the right to carry out any activity not prohibited by law, including entrepreneurial;
- the right to create a legal entity, non-profit public association, etc .;
- the right to take part in civil-contractual legal relations, implying the execution of a transaction;
- the right to choose a place of residence or place of stay;
- copyright and intellectual law.
Based on the provisions of the modern Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the content and concept of legal capacity of citizens includes the right to participate in obligations, which is interpreted as the acquisition of relevant duties. A vivid confirmation of this is Article 17 - it mentions the ability to bear a duty.
The difference between civil legal and administrative
The volume and content of the administrative legal capacity of citizens differ significantly from civil legal capacity. If the basic rights and freedoms belong to a person from the moment of birth, then, for example, the rights of a participant in managerial relations can be acquired by a person only after reaching a certain age.
In addition, administrative legal capacity may include such rights and obligations, which in most cases depend on age, health, the availability of an appropriate level of education and other circumstances. To become a participant in administrative legal relations, it is important to meet the required level of intellectual and mental development, to have sufficient knowledge, life and work experience.
The principle of equality in determining the legal capacity of individuals
It is impossible to clearly establish the limits and content of legal capacity of citizens at a theoretical level. To some extent, it can be characterized by the principle of equal rights of citizens provided for in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. If you follow the letter of the law, absolutely all citizens have the same legal capacity. Regardless of many factors, Russian citizens are recognized as equal persons. The ability to have rights and obligations does not depend on:
- gender;
- racial and national characteristics;
- language and origin;
- financial situation;
- living place;
- worldview, religious beliefs, etc.
The emergence and termination of legal capacity
As already mentioned, every person acquires legal capacity from birth, however, he can take advantage of far from all of its elements. The concept and content of legal capacity of citizens, the emergence and termination of individual components raise a number of questions. 
Based on the principle of equality, individuals cannot have the same rights and obligations in terms of volume. The fact of birth itself does not allow to establish the legal capacity of the newborn in full. In addition, the term “moment of birth” requires additional clarification, because in some situations its interpretation may be of fundamental importance. For example, in resolving disputes on the inheritance case, a child is vested with legal capacity from the moment he is born. In this context, the vitality of the baby does not matter. Regardless of whether the child was born healthy or died after a few seconds, from the moment he was born, he became the owner of rights and obligations.
With the onset of biological death, a person ceases to be considered a subject of law, while the content of legal capacity does not matter. Citizens continue to own their rights and obligations throughout their lives until their actual death, regardless of their ability to work and capacity. The legal capacity of the deceased ceases, and his heirs, in the context of accepting the inheritance, arise. Thus, the fact of death entails the simultaneous termination and occurrence of legal capacity.
Is it possible to abandon one's own legal capacity?
Another point to which attention should be paid is the impossibility of alienation and limitation of legal capacity of citizens. The concept and content of some articles of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation sufficiently disclose the issue. For example, article 22 establishes that any transactions that limit legal capacity are invalidated. Each person can dispose of his rights subject to the observance of legal requirements and norms, however, he is not able to transfer part of his own legal capacity or minimize it.
When are citizens' rights restricted?
A contradiction from the above arises from the possibility of limiting certain elements of legal capacity. A literal understanding of legal norms often leads to a discrepancy with their actual meaning. It would seem that the right to independently choose a place for permanent residence is included in the content of the legal capacity of individuals, and citizens can settle in any region of the Russian Federation. At the same time, there are territories regulated by the state in a special regime (border lines, military units, etc.). You cannot live in these places. Another example is the right of citizens to carry out entrepreneurial activities. The law expressly prohibits individuals from providing insurance services or selling weapons.
When forced restrictions on human rights are permitted
Meanwhile, the content of the legal capacity of citizens may be limited in accordance with the laws. It is, rather, a forced restriction of the legal capacity of a person:
- in the execution of a court decision on restriction of freedom, arrest;
- in imposing a sentence implying a ban on engaging in certain activities;
- in other cases, in the absence of unlawful actions (inaction) of the citizen as part of the offense.
An example is article 66 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes the possibility of a legal ban or restriction on the participation of certain categories of individuals in business companies and partnerships.
At the same time, citizens are not forbidden to be members of open joint stock companies. An individual has the right to be a partner in only one partnership in faith, which, of course, limits legal capacity to some extent.
Deprivation and restriction of legal capacity of a person
Speaking about the administrative sphere, which permits restricting a person’s legal capacity upon reaching a specified age, it is worth noting article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Restriction of the rights of individuals is possible in the case of:
- the need to protect the constitutional system of the state;
- upholding the interests of society and individuals;
- undermining the country's defense and security.
Moreover, the procedure for limiting legal capacity can be carried out only subject to a number of conditions and rules. If at least one of them is not fulfilled, an act indicating a restriction is declared null and void in accordance with Article 22 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. 
It is impossible to limit a person’s legal capacity by force; such a step will have nothing to do with the legal deprivation of elements of a civil legal personality. For example, confiscation of property, indicated by a court verdict, deprives a person of the right to own it, but does not limit his legal capacity to acquire property and own it in the future.