December 5, 2025

Non-Interference in the Management Activities of Supervisored Persons as a Criterion of Determining the Limits of Prosecutorial Activities

Key Points

Non-interference is essential for prosecutorial limits on economic activities and judicial practice, ensuring legal integrity.
Key terms include economic activities, judicial practice, and statistical information, highlighting their role in legal interpretations.
The hermeneutic approach guided this analysis across relevant regulatory texts and judicial explanations.
Supports the need for legal adjustments to reduce unjustified intervention by prosecutorial authorities.

Abstract

The article examines the problem of understanding the prohibition of interference in operational and economic activities as a basic category in determining the limits of prosecutorial intervention. The ambiguity of the formulations of the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation” used, and the different perception of the positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation lead to different interpretations in law enforcement, including distortion of the legal nature of the prosecutor’s acts, complicating the prosecutor’s response to violations of laws and creating grounds for abuse of the right to judicial protection. The aim of the study is to improve approaches to understanding the essence and content of the non‑interference principle of prosecutorial authorities in the operational and managerial activities of supervised bodies and organizations. The main method of the study was the hermeneutic approach. The study is based on the interpretation of the texts of regulatory acts, materials of judicial practice, and official statistical information. The term “managerial activity” is proposed as a universal term relevant for any organizational structures supervised by the prosecutor’s office. The thesis that this ban should cover all supervised persons and all external functional areas of prosecutorial activity is argued. The unacceptability of absolutizing the principle of non‑interference of prosecutorial authorities in the operational and economic activities of organizations is substantiated, and it is proposed to change the specified wording to a ban on unjustified interference of prosecutorial authorities in the managerial activities of supervised persons. The mandatory nature of prosecutorial response acts for execution and the right of the prosecutor to indicate specific measures to eliminate the identified violations in the operative part of the submissions are noted. Adjustments to the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation” and clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are proposed.

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay