DOI: 10.7256/2454-0595.2016.4.16881

Abstract: The research subject is the analysis of the current legislation regulating the legal status of federal executive authorities, and the analysis of the existing approaches to defining their essence, functions and responsibilities. The methodology of systematizing functions and responsibilities will serve as a basis for the development of classification models for the functions and responsibilities of executive authorities and the methodology of their preparation and processing. The need for the classifier of functions and responsibilities of executive authorities is determined by the purposes of optimization of public (municipal) administration in the respective spheres and a qualitative improvement of the procedures of interaction between the state and physical and legal entities. The research methodology is based on the recent achievements of epistemology. The authors apply general scientific and theoretical research methods (dialectics, the system method, analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, observation, and modeling), traditional legal methods (formal-logical), and the methods of specific sociological studies (statistical, expert assessments, etc.), the methods of segmentation, classification, and correlation, and the comparative method. The authors conclude that it is necessary to correlate the departmental functions and the private (specific) responsibilities of executive authorities by means of the correlation method based on the paradigm admitting the universalism of private (specific) functions for the sectoral (departmental) functions of executive authorities. The authors develop the methodology of systematizing the functions and responsibilities of federal executive authorities and the methodology of preparation and processing the classifier of functions and responsibilities of the executive agency for the purpose of optimizing the public (municipal) administration in the respective spheres and a qualitative improvement of the procedures of interaction between the state and physical and legal entities.  

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0692.2016.1.16613

Abstract: The article focuses on the current norms of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, regulating the notion of administrative suspension of activity as a form of administrative punishment, as well as the materials of judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, containing the normative interpretations of this form of administrative liability. This form of punishment is inflicted only in a judicial proceeding for up to 90 days. Imposition of this sanction is determined by emergencies, threatening life and health of people, epidemic, epizootic, etc. However, the analysis of legal requirements of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation indicates that this form of administrative punishment is often used as an alternative to other forms of administrative punishment – administrative fines and confiscation. The authors study the legal nature of this sanction, the real purpose of which is an immediate cessation of illegal actions on the part of the subject, infringing legal regulations.The methodological basis for the article contains the recent achievements of epistemology. The authors apply general philosophical and theoretical methods (dialectics, the systems method, analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, observation, modeling), traditional legal methods (formal logical), and the methods of specific sociological studies (statistical, expert evaluation, etc.).The authors conclude that it is necessary to exclude this form of administrative punishment from the sanctions of Chapter 14 of the Code of Administrative Offences, since the application of this punishment contradicts its administrative and preclusive legal nature and stimulates corruptogenic risks. The main contribution of the authors is a comprehensive study of scientific and methodological approaches and materials of judicial practice, revealing the pronounced administrative-preclusive nature of this measure of administrative coercion. The novelty of the article lies in the proposals on optimization of administrative sanctions provided in Chapter 14 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation.

DOI: 10.7256/2306-9945.2015.5.17507

Abstract: The research subject includes the current international and national regulatory instruments and international agreements containing the definitions “transparency” and “openness” in respect of private and public relations, including the institution of public service. At present, the category of “transparency” is embodied in many international agreements and national regulatory instruments, and is being actively developed on the scientific methodological level. But this category is not contained in fundamental regulatory instruments, regulating the institution of public service in the Russian Federation; it raises the question of the possibility to apply this category within the institution of public service. The research methodology is based on the recent achievements of epistemology. The authors apply general scientific and theoretical methods (dialectics, the comparative approach, the system analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, observation, modeling), traditional legal methods (formal logical), and the methods of specific sociological research (statistical, expert assessments, etc.). The authors conclude that it is necessary to transfer the definition “transparency” from the scientific and methodological sphere to the formal legal one, i.e. it is necessary to legislate this definition in legal acts regulating the institution of public service in the Russian Federation. The authors carry out the comparative analysis of the categories “transparency” and “openness” in international agreements and regulatory instruments with a view to applying the category “transparency” in respect of the institute of public service in the Russian Federation. The authors propose the ways of legal confirmation of the term “transparency” in the current legislation regulating the institution of public service in the Russian Federation.