Ending the Discussion on the Understanding of the Administrative Process

A discussion that has been going on for decades in the Russian legal doctrine about the understanding of the administrative process, according to one of its most active participants, Professor Yu. N. Starilov – a supporter of the judicial interpretation of the administrative process, has lost its meaning today and only hinders the adoption of overdue legal decisions. From the point of view of the named specialist, the legislator must put an end to this discussion by forcing legal scholars and practitioners to use the “correct” terms. In this regard, as the purpose of the presented research the Author has chosen to clarify the issue of the existence of legal grounds for a clear and unambiguous understanding of the administrative process, to determine the content of this legal concept. The subject of the research is legal norms and judicial acts, which use “administrative-procedural” terminology. The hypothesis of the research is that at present there are necessary and sufficient legal grounds to complete the discussion in the legal doctrine on the understanding of the administrative process. To prove the hypothesis and formulate the conclusions of the study, dialectical, formal-logical, formal-legal, comparative legal methods of cognition, the method of interpreting law, and analysis of materials of judicial practice are used. The study makes it possible to conclude that the current domestic legislation provides for the necessary and sufficient legal basis for understanding the Russian administrative process as a legal concept, meaningfully consisting of three parts: a) administrative judicial proceedings; b) proceedings on cases of administrative offenses; c) administrative process (administrative procedures). Hence, the scientific discussion about the understanding of the Russian administrative process, first of all, about the content of this legal concept, should be considered complete in the Author’s opinion. As one of the results of the study, the Author also notes the dualistic nature of the administrative process, given to it by Russian legislation and expressed in the existence of administrative judicial proceedings (carried out by a court) and an administrative out-of-court process (carried out by the public administration). This circumstance must certainly be taken into account when developing future administrative procedural legislative decisions. At the same time, the doctrinal recognition of the status of administrative procedural for the relevant activities of the public administration, to a much greater extent than the qualification of such activities as administrative and procedural, advocated by the followers of the judicial concept of administrative process, will contribute to the implementation of the idea of protection in the federal law on administrative proceedings (administrative procedures) being drafted of human and civil rights in relations with public administration and, in general, ensuring an appropriate level of proceduralization of administrative activities that meets the standards of a legal state.