On exemption from administrative liability in case of a minor administrative offense

Introduction. A number of specific issues are central to modern national practice of application of legislation on administrative. It is preconditioned by constant improvement of legislation, which is carried out to effectively counter internal and external challenges to the Russian state and society. The principle of justice retains its paramount importance, determining the status of the mechanism of administrative responsibility precisely as a means of public administration. The peculiarities of the practical implementation of this principle are expressed, among other things, in the institution of exemption from administrative liability, one of the grounds of which is the insignificance of an administrative offense - an evaluative category that is significant for the practice of applying legislation on administrative offenses. Materials and methods. The study is based on the analysis of provisions of the current legislation on administrative liability, materials from relevant judicial practice and the work of researchers on this issue. Analysis. The provisions of the current legislation and rulings of higher courts containing explanations of these provisions do not provide a comprehensive picture of the specifics of the application of the rules on the insignificance of an administrative offense, including the relevant categories of cases and the subject composition. Results. Based on the results of the study, we can conclude that the rules on exemption from administrative liability in the event of a minor administrative offense require additional clarification from the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to determine the categories of violations to which these rules apply, as well as the range of subjects to which they apply. The author's position on possible answers to the questions posed is formulated.

1. Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses dated December 30, 2001 № 195-FL in Collection. Russian legislation Federation. 2002. Vol. 1 (part 1), Art. 1; 2023. Vol. 21. Art. 3794. (In Russ.).

2. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 24, 2005 № 5 “On some issues that arise for courts when applying the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses” in Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2005. Vol. 6. (In Russ.).

3. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 19, 2013 № 40 “On amendments to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 24, 2005 № 5 “On some issues that arise for courts when applying the Code of the RussianFederation on Administrative Offenses” in Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2014. Vol. 2. February. (In Russ.).

4. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated June 2, 2004 № 10 “On some issues that arose in judicial practice when considering cases of administrative offenses” in Bulletin of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. Vol. 8, 2004; Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2018. Vol. 3. March. (In Russ.).

5. Bastrykin A.I. Topical problems of improving the judicial system and the activities of the courts of the Russian Federation: a lecture. Yuridicheskaya mysl'. 2022;3(127):188-210. (In Russ.).

6. Bezhentsev AA, Pauk NN. The insignificance of an administrative offense: the possibility of exemption from administrative liability. Kriminologicheskiy zhurnal. 2023;3:31-35. (In Russ.).

7. Voropaev DA. Justice as a moral and legal category and its formalization in national legislation. Vestnik Akademii MVD Respubliki Belarus'. 2022;2(44):46-53. (In Russ.).

8. Keramova SN. Some problems of legislation on administrative offenses in Russia. Yuridicheskiy vestnik DGU. 2023;45(1):48-51. (In Russ.).

9. Makareiko NV. Legislative examination of the limits of administrative responsibility. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika. 2022;16:136-139. (In Russ.).

10. Popov AV, Fomina IA. The concept and criteria of insignificance of a committed administrative offense. Sibirskoe yuridicheskoe obozrenie. 2023;20;2:132-144. (In Russ.).

11. Prokhorov-Malyasov GS. Post-information society is a key stage of social transformation. Prognostic aspect. Kontekst i refleksiya: filosofiya o mire i cheloveke. 2022;11;6A:137-147. (In Russ.).

12. Strus KA, Dorofeev IA. On the issue of the insignificance of environmental violations. Universum: ekonomika i yurisprudentsiya. 2023;8(107):22-27. (In Russ.).

13. Khmelevskaya TA. Petty theft of someone else's property and a minor act: issues of judicial and doctrinal interpretation. Trudy Orenburgskogo instituta (filiala) Moskovskoy gosudarstvennoy yuridicheskoy akademii. 2023;1(55):94-98. (In Russ.).

14. Chukin DS. Justice as a legal category and its types in the context of judicial discretion. Izvestiya Saratovskogo voennogo instituta voysk natsional'noy gvardii. 2022;1(6):82-88. (In Russ.).

15. The Court of Cassation prohibited forgiving people for burglary. Rossiyskaya Gazeta. URL: https://rg.ru/2023/09/28/gostem-ne-schitat.html (accessed: 10.19.2023). (In Russ.).