The Constitutional Law Function of Administrative Offense Proceedings in Courts of General Jurisdiction

The paper defines the place of judicial proceedings in cases of administrative offenses in courts of general jurisdiction (administrative offense proceedings in courts of general jurisdiction, or AOP in CGJ) within the administrative process system, based on the function of these proceedings. The author concludes that, contrary to the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (CAO RF), this area, influenced by constitutional legislation, has developed distinctions from the function of non-judicial administrative jurisdiction. The purpose of judicial proceedings extends beyond merely combating offenses and achieving the objectives of administrative liability. It must ensure a fair resolution of public law disputes. AOP in CGJ serves the function of independent external review of the managerial initiatives of public administration, as expressed in the acts of the prosecuting authority or a non-judicial body of administrative jurisdiction, with respect to their compliance with the law in light of general legal principles and values. Consequently, AOP in CGJ is not functionally integrated with non-judicial proceedings as a homogeneous procedural activity and does not represent a «continuation» of nonjudicial administrative jurisdiction. However, AOP in CGJ has become the subject of contradictory legal regulation, as its constitutional law function is not congruent with the CAO RF. This disparity poses challenges in judicial practice. For these reasons, the author suggests, within the framework of the third codification, to extract not the entire procedural section from the CAO RF, but rather the provisions concerning AOP in CGJ, isolating them into a separate law titled «On Judicial Administrative Jurisdiction».

1. Dugenets AS. Administrative Jurisdictional Process. Moscow: All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia Publ.; 2003. (In Russ.).

2. Galagan IA. Administrative Liability in the USSR (A State and Material Law Study). Voronezh: Voronezh State University Publ.; 1970. (In Russ.).

3. Galagan IA. Administrative Liability in the USSR: Procedural Regulation. Voronezh: Voronezh State University Publ.; 1976. (In Russ.).

4. Gyudumyan VG. Administrative responsibility in retrospect and prospect. Lex russica. 2017;7:151-165. (In Russ.).

5. Kaplunov AI. Administrative responsibility as a form of administrative coercion. Siberian Legal Review. 2019;16(4):518-524. (In Russ.).

6. Kononov KA. The development of the law on administrative responsibility in Russia. Lex russica. 2016;1:34-37. (In Russ.).

7. Makareyko NV. Administrative responsibility in the system of public legal responsibility. Vestnik of Lobachevsky University of Nizhni Novgorod. 2020;4:105-110. (In Russ.).

8. Mamatkazin IR. The importance of the conceptual framework in revealing the nature and function of social security payments. Social and Pension Law. 2023;3:27-33. (In Russ.).

9. Martyshin OV. Can the main types of understanding of law be compatible? The State and Law. 2003;6:13-21. (In Russ.).

10. Nesterov VM. Areas of the improvement of jurisdiction and differentiation of the procedural form in hearing of administrative offense cases by courts. Administrative Law and Procedure. 2022;6:39-42. (In Russ.).

11. Pankova OV. Administrative cases and cases of administrative offences as the subject of administrative and judicial jurisdiction. Laws од Russia: Experience, Analysis, Practice. 2019;5:59-65. (In Russ.).

12. Pankova OV. The procedural and legal mechanism for the administration of justice in cases of administrative offenses in courts of general jurisdiction. Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2022. (In Russ.).

13. Popov LL. Administrative procedure law as an independent branch of the Russian law. Administrative Law and Procedure. 2019;5:9-11. (In Russ.).

14. Razorenov KI. The function of administrative prosecution in the administrative jurisdiction process. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2011. (In Russ.).

15. Rossinskiy BV. Is the delineation between administrative proceedings and proceedings regarding administrative offenses definitive? Journal of the Administrative Proceedings. 2016;1:49-51. (In Russ.).

16. Rossinskiy BV. Reflections about the government and administrative responsibility. Administrative Law and Procedure. 2016;5:6-24. (In Russ.).

17. Serkov PP. Administrative Liability in Russian Law: Contemporary Understanding and New Approaches. Moscow: Norma, Infra M Publ.; 2012. (In Russ.).

18. Shafirov VM. Natural-Positive Law: An Introduction to the Theory. Krasnoyarsk: ITs KrasGU Publ.; 2004. (In Russ.).

19. Shchepalov SV. On the origins of administrative and judicial discretion in Russian administrative and jurisdictional activities. Siberian Legal Review. 2023;20(3):297-312. (In Russ.).

20. Shergin AP. Administrative jurisdictional process as a form of a legal process. Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL). 2015;8:140-147. (In Russ.).

21. Shergin AP. Administrative prosecution as a function administrative-jurisdictional process. Pravovaya politika i pravovaya zhizn. 2023;2:155-162. (In Russ.).

22. Shishkina OE. Proceedings on administrative offences: search for constitutional frameworks and standards of justice (on the basis of the Russian Constitutional Court’s case-law). Journal of Constitutional Justice. 2015;3:19- 27. (In Russ.).

23. Starostin SA. Prospects for the Codification of Administrative Procedural Law Standards. In: Solovey YuP (ed.). Current Issues in Administrative Proceedings: Proceedings of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference (Omsk, 28 July 2014). Omsk; 2015. (In Russ.).

24. Tuzov NA. The expression of the functions of judicial authorities in judicial acts. Journal of Russian Law. 2008;10:95-104. (In Russ.).

25. Vinokurov AYu. Administrative pursuit as function of office of public prosecutor of Russian federation: theoretical, legal and organizational aspects. Administrative and Municipal Law. 2012;10:52-56. (In Russ.).

26. Yershov VV. The Status of the Court in a Rule of Law State. Moscow; 1992. (In Russ.).

27. Zokirov TZ. Prerequisites of the principle of federalism in the legal regulation of administrative responsibility (on the example of managerial decisions). Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL). 2024;5(117):199- 207.