PROBLEMS OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR AN OFFENCE IN THE FIELD OF DRUGS TURNOVER, PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES AND THEIR PRECURSORES

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 131-139
Author(s):  
Болотин ◽  
Igor Bolotin
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Drug Users ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Psychotropic Substances ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The article summarizes the nature and purpose of the institution of administrative responsibility in the sphere of drugs turnover and psychotropic substances, the results of modern research in this area. The problems of its improvement are considered taking into account emerging challenges and conflicts of the implementation of changes in administrative law from the standpoint of the theory of administrative law and enforcement practices and suggestions for their resolution. The problems of applying administrative expulsion to foreign citizens and people without citizenship on the basis of positions of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, generalization of the practice of the Federal courts are separately identified. The value and arising problems from the implementation of the mechanism of legal motivation of drug users to treatment and rehabilitation are provided, and suggestions on improving administrative legal regulation in this sphere of public relations are presented.

Reform of the Institute of Administrative Responsibility in the Russian Federation in the Changing Paradigm of Regulatory Oversight Procedures

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
R. L. Miftakhov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Regulatory Oversight ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Quantitative Changes ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The Code of administrative offences of the Russian Federation has undergone numerous changes during its existence. At the same time, the changes are often opportunistic and haphazard. Administrative responsibility is the reaction of the state to the violation of the established rules. The legislation on administrative responsibility, as a mechanism to ensure the protection of public relations, in fact, does not fully perform its functions. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of human rights in their decisions repeatedly pointed to the system errors contained in the Code of administrative offences, but so far in the administrative and tort legislation, these contradictions have not been eliminated. The purpose of this work is to study the processes taking place in political life aimed at changing the institution of administrative responsibility. Achieving this goal of the study led to the formulation and solution of the following tasks: analysis of the quantitative changes made to the Code of administrative offences of the Russian Federation, the current state of the Institute of administrative responsibility, analysis and description of the changes in the regulation of control and Supervisory activities, communication of control and Supervisory activities with the Institute of administrative responsibility, description of the functions of administrative responsibility and justification for the need to focus on the most important of them during the reform of control and Supervisory activities. The methodological basis of the study was the dialectical method of scientific knowledge, General scientific and private methods of analysis, focused on the knowledge of the current changes in the regulation of control and Supervisory procedures, as it is associated with the reform of the Institute of administrative responsibility and the need to adjust the current Code of administrative offences. The article reveals the essence of the current changes in the regulation of control and Supervisory procedures and how it is connected with the reform of administrative responsibility. The author concludes that a huge number of changes made to the administrative Code have led to a departure from the main functions of administrative responsibility. Also, the conclusions about the relationship and interdependence of control and Supervisory activities and administrative responsibility, the need to reform the legislation on administrative responsibility.

scholarly journals Ответственность за административные правонарушения: стандарты ЕСПЧ и российская практика

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (52) ◽  
pp. 135-141
Author(s):  
О.Е. Шишкина
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Systemic Problems ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

Статья посвящена анализу проблем законодательства Российской Федерации об административных правонарушениях и практики его применения сквозь призму вынесенных против России решений Европейского Суда по правам человека. Автор выделяет стандарты, которые используются Европейским Судом по правам человека. Автор также приводит конкретные дела, рассмотренные Европейским Судом, и формулирует ряд системных проблем российского административно-деликтного права, главную из которых можно обозначить как «материальная расточительность при процессуальной экономии». Автор считает методологической ошибкой российского законодательства объединение в одном Кодексе (КоАП РФ) регулирования судебной процедуры привлечения к административной ответственности, которая должна быть состязательной, и внесудебного инквизиционного порядка рассмотрения дел об административных правонарушениях. . This article is devoted to the analysis of the problems of the legislation of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses and the practice of its application through the prism of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights against Russia. The author highlights the standards that are used by the European Court of Human Rights. The author also cites specific cases considered by the European Court and formulates a number of systemic problems of Russian administrative law, the main of which can be described as “material waste in procedural economy”. The author considers a methodological mistake of the Russian legislation to unite in one Code (CAO RF) the regulation of the judicial procedure for administrative responsibility, which should be adversarial, and not the judicial inquisitorial procedure for the consideration of cases of administrative offenses.

scholarly journals Administrative Liability for Offenses Related to Labor Relations in View of the Coming Adoption of a New Administrative Offense Code of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 32-37
Author(s):  
Aleksey A. Grishkovets ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Labor Relations ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The author of the article analyzes theses of project of new Code of Russian Federation about administrative offence sphere labour relationships. To authors mind norms of administrative law and labour law interact closely as a result their systematically using in some spheres of legal regulation. One of them is sphere of administrative responsibility for offence in sphere of labour relationships. The author compares appropriate norms of acting Code of Russian Federation about administrative offence with project of new Code.

scholarly journals To the question about the possibility of using the results of the operational search activities in criminal proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 180-185
Author(s):  
N. A. Mikhailichenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article analyzes the issue of the lack of proper legal regulation of requirements for the results of operational-search activities used in the field of criminal proceedings. A separate place is given to the problem of assessing the presented results of operational-search activities. On the basis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights, a solution to this problem is proposed. At the same time, the provision is taken as a basis that any, in direct or indirect form, affecting the constitutional rights of citizens in the course of operational-search activities, entails the need to obtain a court decision for such activities. The question of the need to reform the criminal legislation is outlined. 

scholarly journals Waiver of rights in Russian criminal procedure: Issues of theory, legislative regulation, and law enforcement

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 651-665
Author(s):  
Irina N. Chebotareva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Freedom Of Choice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right

The article discusses the waiver of procedural rights as a particular legal phenomenon. The rationale for studying the waiver of rights in the Russian criminal procedure doctrine arises from the expansion of the spheres of disposition and adversarial nature in present-day Russian criminal procedure. In order to form an overall picture of the ‘waiver of rights’, the article describes its distinctive features and elements that characterize it. Additionally, the theoretical aspects of the waiver of rights in present-day Russian criminal procedures, as well as the legal regulation of a waiver, are analyzed. A waiver of subjective rights is understood as an expression of a legal person’s will in terms of failure to behave as provided for by objective law, which is characterized by voluntariness, awareness, and freedom of choice. It is asserted that any non-realization of rights by a subject is not considered a waiver. The difference is demonstrated in the understanding of the concept ‘waiver of rights’ in the approaches of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, as well as in the interpretation of the rules of criminal procedural legislation, which regulates a person’s ability to waive the rights granted to them by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. The article states that the disposition principle of legal regulation, applied by the legislator to participants in criminal proceedings defending their personal interests, presupposes the legislatively established possibility of a person to refuse to exercise the right unless it violates the more important public interest. Attention is given in the article to the necessity of guarantees that ensure voluntariness, awareness, and freedom of choice in case of a person’s waiver of their rights.

scholarly journals Types of a Legal Mistake Excluding Criminal Responsibility

Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 74-85
Author(s):  
D. A. Dorogin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
European Court ◽  
Normative Requirements ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Comprehensive Classification

The article deals with the problems of identification of such types of the legal mistake that exclude criminal liability. With regard to the legal regulation and on the basis of the provisions of the criminal law doctrine, the author gives his own classification of the legal mistake and substantiates the necessity of recognition of its legal significance. The author comes to the conclusion that the variety of legal mistakes should be systematized on the basis of two criteria each of which implies two variants of manifestation. They include the cause of the mistake (either a defect of lawmaking or a defect of perception of established normative requirements), as well as the nature of the mistake (either ignorance of the fact of existence of criminal law prohibition or ignorance of its content). Within the framework of a comprehensive classification based on various combinations of the criteria under consideration, four types of the legal mistake that exclude criminal responsibility are distinguished: 1) a mistake caused by a defect in lawmaking and related to the ignorance of the existence of the criminal law prohibition; 2) a mistake caused by a defect in lawmaking and associated with the ignorance of the content of the criminal law prohibition; 3) a mistake caused by a defect in perception of established normative requirements by a person and related to the ignorance of the fact of existence of the criminal law prohibition; 4) a mistake caused by a defect perception by the person of established regulatory requirements and associated with the ignorance of the content of the criminal law prohibition. The article deals with the problems of presumption of knowledge of the law and awareness of wrongfulness of the act with due regard to intersectoral links existing in criminal law. The author refers to the legal stance of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the European Court of Human Rights, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and relies in his conclusions on the examples from case law and jurisprudence, and makes references to foreign experience.

Emergency powers of the authorities of the constituent units of the federation (states) in Russia, the USA and Brazil amid the spread of a new coronavirus infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-107
Author(s):  
Alexander Merkulenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Emergency Powers ◽  
Lack Of Control ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

Due to the new coronavirus pandemic, high alert regimes were introduced across the Russian Federation in spring 2020. These emergency regimes were established exclusively by the state bodies of the Russian Federation’s constituent units – federal authorities did not introduce their own emergency regimes. This decentralized strategy of fighting the pandemic was also introduced by the USA and Brazil. Their states, without the sanction of the federal government, and in the case of Brazil, ignoring its bans, set emergency restrictions similar to those in Russia. The legal regulation of emergency regimes existed before 2020, when constituent units of the federation (states) actively used their emergency powers. However, the regimes introduced during the fight against the pandemic were slightly different to previous ones. The restrictions on rights and freedoms within these regimes were so severe that not only their proportionality was questioned, but there were also doubts as to whether the regional level of the government had the authority to establish such strict restrictions. In addition, the pandemic exposed old problems and revealed new shortcomings in the legal regulation of emergency regimes: lack of control over the realization of the emergency regime by legislative (representative) authorities, and gaps in legislative regulation – notably in the establishment of possible restrictions and of a mechanism for scrutinizing their proportionality. All this raised questions about the proportionality of the established restrictions. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolved a very insignificant amount of the problems. While the United States and Brazil faced similar issues, the practice of scrutinizing implemented restrictions in these countries was more common. This article takes domestic and foreign experiences into account, while examining certain aspects of the establishment and the operation of regional emergency regimes.

scholarly journals The Material and Procedural Aspects of Non Bis In Idem Principle in Proceedings on Administrative Offenses

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 39-42
Author(s):  
Artem R. Nobel ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The essence of the principle of one-time administrative responsibility is considered, its concept and proposals for improving the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation are formulated. The conclusions are based on the provisions of the legislation on administrative offenses, the legal positions of the highest courts of the Russian Federation, the European Court of Human Rights, a comparative analysis of the current criminal and criminal procedure legislation. The operation of the principle non bis in idem in proceedings on the cases of administrative offenses is revealed by highlighting the material and procedural elements that make up its content.

scholarly journals On the Issue of Problems of the Administrative Law Regulation of Civil Firearms Circulation for Self-Defense in the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 74-78
Author(s):  
Ilya S. Gorshkov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Security ◽  
General State ◽  
Degree Of Protection ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Special Place ◽  
The Russian Federation

The general state of providing public security, in which a most important element is the degree of protection of the person from socially dangerous attacks, in any state, is directly related to the quality of regulation of some public relations that directly affect this criterion. Among such public relations, undoubtedly, take a special place the trafficking of civilian firearms for self-defense.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document