Parliamentary procedure as a type of legal procedure

The subject. The article examines the refraction of the doctrine of legal procedure in relation to the activities of parliament. The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove hypothesis that parliamentary procedure is the kind of legal procedure The methodology. The author uses formal legal interpretation of Russian legislative acts and decisions of Russian Constitutional Court and European Court of Human Rights as well as such general scientific methods as analysis, synthesis, systemic approach The main results, scope of application. The author draws attention to the fact that at the present stage of the development of the theory of law, it can be stated that procedural social relations have developed in the parliamentary bureaucracy, which are not only regulated, but must also be regulated by procedural norms, which confirms the conclusions of the authors of a "broad" approach to the theory of legal process. However, there will be a window of opportunity for the supporters of the "narrow" approach in the parliamentary process. In accordance with the conclusions of the ECHR and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which have prerequisites even in the works of Montesquieu, the parliament, as a body with jurisdictional powers, must comply with the appropriate procedure in their implementation. Hence, the author deduces the tasks of further improving both the doctrine of parliamentary procedure and the need for clear and competent regulation of legal procedures in parliament, the ultimate goal of which is to observe and implement the rights, freedoms and constitutional guarantees of participants in the parliamentary process. Conclusions. The procedures governing the work of the Parliament and its organs are legal procedures in the broad sense of the term. This does not negate the understanding that the legal procedures of the parliament, corresponding to its quasi-judicial powers, has the nature of the jurisdictional process. This conclusion is consistently confirmed in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.