Liability for Administrative Offences: Standards of European Court of Human Rights and the Current State of the Legislation on Administrative Offences in Russia
Abstract
Recently, there has been a substantial increase in the number of judgments delivered by the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the Russian Federation on the complaints filed by Russian citizens, including the complaints related to the liability for administrative offences. The characteristic tendency of the European Court of Human Rights to qualify administrative offences as criminal acts not only brings into focus the issue of ensuring procedural safeguards for individuals charged with administrative offences but also touches upon material aspects of the relation between criminal and administrative law-breaking in Russia as well as changes the traditional juristic view upon the essence of the legislation on administrative offence. Political and economic reforms of Perestroika and the first post-Soviet decade had a significant influence on the institution of administrative justice. Hence, on the one hand, its current state is caused by objective reasons. On the other hand, the legislator, having quite a broad discretion in determining whether to impose administrative or criminal sanctions in each particular case, has seriously blurred the material boundary between criminal and administrative offences. The problem of present-day legislation on administrative offences in Russia is a material hypertrophy of administrative liability together with continuous reduction of procedural safeguards and guarantees for individuals charged with administrative offences. The procedural norms of the existing Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation cannot provide for the adversarial nature of the administrative trial due to the fact that the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation is not methodologically aimed at regulating administrative (judicial) proceedings.
References
[2] Golovko, L. 2013. Relation between criminal and administrative offences in the frame of the concept Criminal matter. International justice. No. 1 (15). P. 46 (InRuss.).
[3] Esakov, G.A. 2013. From an administrative offence to an administrative misdemeanor, or On the existence of criminal law ‘in a broad sense. The forensic library. An academic journal. No. 1 (6). P. 42 (InRuss.).
[4] Kirin, A.V. 2013. Once again on the genesis of administrative responsibility in Russian legislation (or my reply to the proponents of ‘broad’ criminal law). Administrative law and process. No. 7. P. 55 (InRuss.).
[5] Knyazev, S.D. 2014. Constitutional standards of administrative responsibility in the legislation of the Russian Federation. Administrative law and process. No. 2. P. 16-22 (In Russ.).
[6] Mishina, E.T. 2017. The Re-birth of Soviet criminal law in post-Soviet Russia. Russian Law Journal. Volume V (2017) Issue 1.57-58.
[7] Pankova, O.V. 2014. Examining cases of administrative offence in courts of general jurisdiction, ed. Egorova, O.A., Moscow: Statute, P. 67 (InRuss.).
[8] Starilov, Yu.N. 2015. Modernization of administrative legislation: reasons, potential and perspectives. Law and order: history, theory, practice. No. 1 (4). P.20 (In Russ.).
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.