Control and Supervisory Activities as an Institute of Administrative Law

This article discusses the currently relevant direction of the ongoing reform of the “regulatory guillotine.” Specifically, the article focuses on the development of new trends in the regulation of control and supervisory activities. The reasons for the reform, its goals and objectives, as well as the results achieved, are analyzed. It is concluded that the key reason for the launch of the “regulatory guillotine” is the problem of redundancy and moral obsolescence of the regulatory framework. Furthermore, the current state of control and supervision activities carried out by the public authorities of the Russian Federation is characterized, trends are analyzed and the results of the ongoing reforms are summarized. One of the main problems in the implementation of the reform is corruption. Excessive bureaucratization of control and supervisory activities is highlighted as a key factor influencing the transition to electronic document management. In connection with the identified problems, the following potential areas for future research have been identified: the introduction and legitimization of electronic document management, the reduction of corruption, the impossibility of withdrawing from the reform of some departments, the identification of all kinds of threats and so on. In evaluating the effectiveness of the activities of control and supervisory bodies in foreign countries, the emphasis has shifted away from assessing the actual number of inspections, violations detected, fines and penalties imposed, open criminal cases, the amounts of illegally spent public funds returned to the budget, etc., and to assessing the “quantity” and the “quality” of the facts revealed and the events prevented in advance, which in one way or another contained a potential threat to the security of the state and society. It was thus implied that there was a risk of not achieving socially significant indicators (results), on the basis of which society ultimately evaluates the activities of government bodies in general and the activities of control and supervisory bodies in particular.