行政程序原则体系中的模拟法律现象

D. Kirillov
{"title":"行政程序原则体系中的模拟法律现象","authors":"D. Kirillov","doi":"10.19073/2658-7602-2021-18-2-175-191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the inclusion of the category “simulation” in the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences an interest arose in studying “simulation” in the system of principles of the administrative process. The purpose of the study is to formulate general recommendations for neutralizing the negative consequences of manifestations of feign in the system of principles of the administrative process. The methodological basis of the research is materialistic dialectics and elements of conceptual analysis. The methods of analogy and generalization allow us to justify the use of the construction of “simulated legal phenomenon” for the study of the principles of the administrative process. The survey revealed obstacles to the implementation of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence. The comparative legal analysis allows us to establish the comparability of the volumes of state repression in the measures of administrative and criminal responsibility, a clearly negative assessment of simulation in administrative law compared to its neutral assessment in civil law, to identify a number of obstacles to the functioning of the principles of the administrative process. Other standard research methods are also used. The expediency of analyzing the simulation of the system of principles of the administrative process is justified; a simplified model of the system of principles of the administrative process is used for the analysis; from the standpoint of assessing legal simulation, the analysis of the principle of legality, the principle of procedural equality, the principle of guilt, the principle of presumption of innocence, as well as the principle of respect for the honor and dignity of the individual was carried out. In order to reduce the level of obvious simulation in the system of principles of the administrative process, in particular, it is recommended: in the doctrine of the administrative process to consider the principle of legality not as a reality, but as a goal; in the laws, replace the term “legality” with the term “lawfulness”; in the laws, the wording “the principle of equality before the law” and the like should be replaced with “the principle of equality of rights”; part 1 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences should be amended as follows: “a person is subject to administrative responsibility only for those socially harmful actions (acts of inaction) in respect of which his guilt is established”; part 3 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences after the words: “...is not obliged to prove his innocence” should be supplemented with the words “but has the right to disagree with all or part of the arguments confirming his guilt, or to refute them”. It is also recommended to amend the legislation in order to unify the approach to the differentiation of administrative offenses and crimes.","PeriodicalId":33294,"journal":{"name":"Sibirskoe iuridicheskoe obozrenie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simulated Legal Phenomena in the System of Principles of the Administrative Process\",\"authors\":\"D. Kirillov\",\"doi\":\"10.19073/2658-7602-2021-18-2-175-191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With the inclusion of the category “simulation” in the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences an interest arose in studying “simulation” in the system of principles of the administrative process. The purpose of the study is to formulate general recommendations for neutralizing the negative consequences of manifestations of feign in the system of principles of the administrative process. The methodological basis of the research is materialistic dialectics and elements of conceptual analysis. The methods of analogy and generalization allow us to justify the use of the construction of “simulated legal phenomenon” for the study of the principles of the administrative process. The survey revealed obstacles to the implementation of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence. The comparative legal analysis allows us to establish the comparability of the volumes of state repression in the measures of administrative and criminal responsibility, a clearly negative assessment of simulation in administrative law compared to its neutral assessment in civil law, to identify a number of obstacles to the functioning of the principles of the administrative process. Other standard research methods are also used. The expediency of analyzing the simulation of the system of principles of the administrative process is justified; a simplified model of the system of principles of the administrative process is used for the analysis; from the standpoint of assessing legal simulation, the analysis of the principle of legality, the principle of procedural equality, the principle of guilt, the principle of presumption of innocence, as well as the principle of respect for the honor and dignity of the individual was carried out. In order to reduce the level of obvious simulation in the system of principles of the administrative process, in particular, it is recommended: in the doctrine of the administrative process to consider the principle of legality not as a reality, but as a goal; in the laws, replace the term “legality” with the term “lawfulness”; in the laws, the wording “the principle of equality before the law” and the like should be replaced with “the principle of equality of rights”; part 1 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences should be amended as follows: “a person is subject to administrative responsibility only for those socially harmful actions (acts of inaction) in respect of which his guilt is established”; part 3 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences after the words: “...is not obliged to prove his innocence” should be supplemented with the words “but has the right to disagree with all or part of the arguments confirming his guilt, or to refute them”. It is also recommended to amend the legislation in order to unify the approach to the differentiation of administrative offenses and crimes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sibirskoe iuridicheskoe obozrenie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sibirskoe iuridicheskoe obozrenie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19073/2658-7602-2021-18-2-175-191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sibirskoe iuridicheskoe obozrenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19073/2658-7602-2021-18-2-175-191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着《俄罗斯联邦行政犯罪法》列入“模拟”一类,人们对在行政程序原则体系中研究“模拟”产生了兴趣。本研究的目的是制定一般性建议,以消除外国在行政程序原则体系中的表现形式的负面后果。研究的方法论基础是唯物辩证法和概念分析的要素。类比和概括的方法使我们能够证明使用“模拟法律现象”的构建来研究行政过程的原则是合理的。调查显示,在执行无罪推定的某些方面存在障碍。比较法律分析使我们能够确定国家在行政和刑事责任措施方面的压制程度的可比性,这是对行政法中的模拟与民法中的中立评估相比的明显负面评估,以确定行政程序原则运作的一些障碍。还使用了其他标准研究方法。分析行政程序原则体系模拟的方便性是合理的;采用简化的行政程序原则体系模型进行分析;从评估法律模拟的角度,分析了合法性原则、程序平等原则、有罪原则、无罪推定原则以及尊重个人荣誉和尊严原则。为了降低行政程序原则体系中明显的模拟程度,特别建议:在行政程序原则中,不将合法性原则视为现实,而将其视为目标;在法律中,将“合法性”一词改为“合法”一词;在法律中,“法律面前人人平等原则”等措辞应改为“权利平等原则”;《俄罗斯联邦行政犯罪法》第1.5条第1部分应修改如下:“一个人只对其有罪的对社会有害的行为(不作为行为)承担行政责任”;《俄罗斯联邦行政犯罪法》第1.5条第3部分:“……没有义务证明自己的清白”之后应加上“但有权不同意确认其有罪的全部或部分论点,或反驳这些论点”。还建议修改立法,以统一区分行政犯罪和犯罪的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Simulated Legal Phenomena in the System of Principles of the Administrative Process
With the inclusion of the category “simulation” in the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences an interest arose in studying “simulation” in the system of principles of the administrative process. The purpose of the study is to formulate general recommendations for neutralizing the negative consequences of manifestations of feign in the system of principles of the administrative process. The methodological basis of the research is materialistic dialectics and elements of conceptual analysis. The methods of analogy and generalization allow us to justify the use of the construction of “simulated legal phenomenon” for the study of the principles of the administrative process. The survey revealed obstacles to the implementation of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence. The comparative legal analysis allows us to establish the comparability of the volumes of state repression in the measures of administrative and criminal responsibility, a clearly negative assessment of simulation in administrative law compared to its neutral assessment in civil law, to identify a number of obstacles to the functioning of the principles of the administrative process. Other standard research methods are also used. The expediency of analyzing the simulation of the system of principles of the administrative process is justified; a simplified model of the system of principles of the administrative process is used for the analysis; from the standpoint of assessing legal simulation, the analysis of the principle of legality, the principle of procedural equality, the principle of guilt, the principle of presumption of innocence, as well as the principle of respect for the honor and dignity of the individual was carried out. In order to reduce the level of obvious simulation in the system of principles of the administrative process, in particular, it is recommended: in the doctrine of the administrative process to consider the principle of legality not as a reality, but as a goal; in the laws, replace the term “legality” with the term “lawfulness”; in the laws, the wording “the principle of equality before the law” and the like should be replaced with “the principle of equality of rights”; part 1 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences should be amended as follows: “a person is subject to administrative responsibility only for those socially harmful actions (acts of inaction) in respect of which his guilt is established”; part 3 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences after the words: “...is not obliged to prove his innocence” should be supplemented with the words “but has the right to disagree with all or part of the arguments confirming his guilt, or to refute them”. It is also recommended to amend the legislation in order to unify the approach to the differentiation of administrative offenses and crimes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊最新文献
Administrative Discretion: Questions and Answers (Part 3) Some Features of the Criminal Procedural Status of a Witness On the Origins of Administrative and Judicial Discretion in Russian Administrative and Jurisdictional Activities The Legal Concept of “Source of Increased Danger” Exhaustion of Exclusive Rights to Computer Programs Under the Laws of Russia, the USA, the EU, China and India
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1