Medicalization and Securitization of the Administrative-Public Sphere in the Conditions of the Pandemic in Russia and Germany

Against the background of the widespread introduction of a wide range of social and medical measures to protect the health of citizens in order to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus infection COVID-19, attention is drawn to the growing socio-political trend of medicalization of the entire administrative and public sphere. It is reflected in the increasingly clear "securitization" of many parts of public power, which is reflected in the ongoing redistribution and transformation of police powers. A number of world governments are taking actions to combat the pandemic, from imposing responsibility for poor compliance with the introduced antiepidemiological restrictions to developing a vaccine and conducting mass vaccinations, as a result of which lawmaking is actively pursued. In the extraordinary conditions in Russia, as in other countries of the world, the most effective measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 infection and overcome its consequences were in demand - measures of administrative coercion. The state actively uses the entire arsenal of legal means, including measures of administrative prevention, administrative procedural support and administrative punishment. In the article, the authors analyzed the administrative and legal norms of the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany, aimed at preventing the import and spread of a new corona virus infection (COVID-19). The trends in the expansion of the scale of administrative and police control, the influence of the state on changing the standards of behavior of citizens and the lifestyle of the population, and the movement of significant segments of crime into cyberspace are illustrated. Comprehension of the latest domestic and foreign experience, forms and methods of police-legal influence in order to reflect the danger, confirms the high relevance and important theoretical significance of the study. The authors conclude that at present both for Russia and for Germany the issues of redistribution and transformation of police powers in the administrative-public sphere of any state, reflecting the processes of medicalization and securitization of various links and sectors of public power in response to existential threats, are relevant and promising. directions of scientific research.

Administrative Punishments: Theoretical and Legal Characteristics and Some Problems of Their Infliction

The paper examines some aspects of theoretical views on administrative punishment. The author analyzes the concept of administrative punishment as a measure of responsibility for an administrative offense, its essence and objectives. The study highlights a number of topical problems in the field of legal regulation of the system of administrative punishments that cause difficulties in the correct choice and appointment of administrative punishments. Attention is drawn to the lack of a unified approach for the legislator to establish a system of administrative penalties in terms of their alternative or non-alternative nature. It is shown that some sanctions are incompatible with the nature of the offense; there is a significant gap between the lower and upper limits of penalties in alternative sanctions, a significant difference exists in the sanctions applied to different subjects of the same offense. As a result, the commission of a more socially dangerous act in practice entails infliction of a less severe punishment, which does not meet the goals of prevention. It is noted that in some cases, when deciding on the infliction of an administrative penalty, jurisdictional authorities do not take into account mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Some proposals are made to improve the current legislation on administrative offenses. In particular, the author suggests that it is necessary to correlate all administrative offenses with each other according to the degree of public danger and, on this basis, introduce a system of punishment for administrative offences. It is also proposed to toughen the liability in relation to individuals, since the amount of the fine in relation to individuals and legal entities in some cases differs 50 times. At the same time, the author substantiates the necessity of involving the population in the development of legislative initiatives in this area.

Measuring The Impact of an Administrative Fine on a Company And Its Future Survival: a Case Study From The Czech Republic

An administrative fine is a monetary penalty that may be imposed by a supervisory authoritity as an administrative punishment. Such a fine adversely interferes in the cash flow generation of the company in question. The fine can be described as an investment carrying opportunity costs with no economic returns. However, according to the judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic Pl. ÚS 3/02 of 13 August 2002 it is submitted that the fine cannot be imposed in such an amount that would ultimately be liquidating for the sanctioned entrepreneur. The assessment of whether the specific amount of the fine imposed represents such an intensive interference with the entrepreneur's property that his business activity becomes pointless (i.e., in the long run only for the payment of a fine) is elaborated in this article. Based on a case study from the Czech Republic, this article deals with an example of a suitable methodological procedure, on the basis of which it is possible to evaluate the impact of a specific amount of fine imposed on the property of a sanctioned entrepreneur and assess ex ante whether (i) continuity of his business will be interrupted in the future, i.e., when, as a result of the payment of the fine, he eventually goes bankrupt in the form of insolvency or over-indebtedness and / or (ii) his business activity will only serve to pay the fine and thus become "pointless". The presented economic narrative and methodology are relevant for policy makers and, particularly, for supervisory authorities imposing the fines or assessing the requests for remission.

ABOUT SOME QUESTIONS OF QUALIFICATION OF PETTY THEFT COMMITTED BY A PERSON SUBJECTED TO ADMINISTRATIVE PUNISHMENT

The article examines the problems of administrative prejudice in the criminal law on the example of the operation of regulations stipulated in the Article 1581 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. A legal and technical analysis of the composition of petty theft of other peoples property, committed by a person subjected to administrative punishment. Some controversial issues of qualification of the analyzed criminal offense are considered. Attention is focused on the moment of the end of petty theft of other peoples property, committed by a person subjected to administrative punishment. The issue of necessity and expediency of increasing the cost threshold of petty theft of other peoples property is considered. The article also suggests other ways to improve the criminal legislation of Russia and the practice of its application, aimed at reducing the level of mercenary property crime in the country. It is shown that despite the fact that the appearance of Article 158.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is connected with the introduction of administrative prejudice and, as a result, the criminalization of acts provided for by this Code, the latest law enforcement practice shows an insufficiently high level of effectiveness of this criminal law institution.

A State of Administrative Punishment

The paper analyzes the negative legal consequences associated with the fact of bringing to administrative responsibility and circumstances occurring after the end of the execution of the sentence. These consequences are established not only by the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, but also by many other laws. They differ among themselves in the content and duration of the periods during which they arise and continue. Based on this, the author concludes that it is necessary to introduce a concept similar to the concept of "conviction" in criminal law into the legislation on administrative offenses, and talk about the "state of administrative punishment" that should be understood as a special legal status of a person brought to administrative responsibility, characterized by the possibility of the imposition of a more severe punishment in the event of a repeated offense and the application of other negative measures. Under the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, the term of administrative punishment is one year, i.e. any negative consequences of being brought to administrative responsibility can take place within a year after the end of the execution of the sentence, including the possibility of imposing a more severe punishment for the repeated offense, recording the information about the facts of bringing to responsibility during employment, disseminating information about the fact of committing an offense. After the expiry of the term of administrative punishment, the person should be considered not previously brought to administrative responsibility. After that term no negative consequences associated with this fact can take place. As in criminal law, the term of administrative punishment can differentiate depending on the gravety of the offense or the type of punishment imposed. The mechanism is provided for the early termination of the state of administrative punishment.

Administrative suspension of operations for violations of industrial safety: theoretical and practical issues

The subject. The main issues of law enforcement activity on the application of administrative punishment in the form of administrative suspension of operations for identified offenses in the field of industrial safety of hazardous production facilities.The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove hypothesis that Russian legislation allows the resumption of activities after the expiration of the period of its suspension without eliminating violations of industrial safety.The methodology of research is logical analysis of Russian legislation, statistical data and judicial decisions concerning enforcement of administrative suspension of operations in Russia.The main results. There is an ambiguous approach in the scientific literature to fixing the administrative suspension of operations in the system of administrative penalties. The effectiveness of its application is noted by some authors. At the same time, there are adverse consequences associated with the application of administrative suspension of operations for the further production activities of economic entities. Social tension in the collective of enterprises, difficulties of recovery after forced downtime, unclear prospects for further economic activity – this is not a complete list of problems arising in connection with the administrative suspension of activity. When making a court decision, judges often appoint a fine as a penalty and rarely a penalty in the form of suspension of operations. This is due to the complexity of the actual realization of suspension of operations, the special social significance of objects; the lack of a specialist's conclusion about the real danger of an offense. But if violations of industrial safety are detected during the operation of hazardous production facilities, it is initially possible to assume a high probability of serious consequences for the life and health of people, the environmental safety. Administrative suspension of activities is carried out by both judicial and non-judicial control authorities. In authors’ opinion, the application of this type of administrative punishment should be exclusively in the judicial jurisdiction. The law enforcement judicial practice concerning administrative suspension of operations in Russia is not uniform.Conclusions. There is a legal uncertainty in the mechanism of imposing administrative punishment in the form of administrative suspension of operations for violations of industrial safety of hazardous production facilities (Article 9.1 of the Russian Code of Administrative Offences). The uncertainty is manifested in the fact that the economic entity does not always eliminate the detected violations within the legally established period and after the expiration of the period for which the activity was suspended, the company resumes its activities nevertheless. Such opportunity reduces the preventive value of this punishment.

Administrative and Prejudicial Grounds for Extending the Probation Period or Revoking the Suspended Sentence

The article deals with the issues arising from the extension of the probation period or the abolition of probation in the Commission of convicted violations of public order. The concept of administrative prejudice is analyzed. The position that besides violations of public order to include as the basis of extension of probation period or cancellation of conditional condemnation Commission by the person of violations in the field of traffic is proved. In particular, it was revealed the need to check the court when considering the submission of the criminal-Executive inspection whether the decision was made in the framework of administrative proceedings, whether the administrative punishment is lawful.

Optimization of justice: administrative offense cases in Russia

The article is devoted to the study of the problems of legal regulation of jurisdiction and jurisdiction of cases of administrative offenses in the light of the forthcoming reform of administrative tort legislation. The author shows how the issues of optimizing jurisdiction and jurisdiction in such cases are related to solving the problem of ineffectiveness in the administration of justice in the sphere of administrative-tort relations and restoring the systemic character of legislative regulation of administrative responsibility, establishing clear criteria for the distribution of cases of administrative offenses between judicial and non-judicial bodies, with one hand, and within individual links of the judicial system — on the other. Particular attention is paid to substantiating the need to establish a predominantly out-of-court procedure for considering cases of administrative offenses. At the same time, it is emphasized that the optimization of the administrative and jurisdictional activities of the courts should be associated with such factors as the social significance and direction of the unlawful act, as well as the severity of administrative punishment. In this regard, the appointment of administrative punishments in the form of a warning, deprivation of special rights and administrative expulsion in the form of an independent departure from the Russian Federation is proposed to be attributed to the exclusive competence of the executive authorities.With regard to an administrative fine, the author concludes that only in cases where the size of the fine is comparable to a more severe administrative penalty or the amount of increased fines established for crimes in similar areas of activity, its imposition should be attributed to the exclusive competence of the court.In certain cases, it is also proposed to introduce a simplified procedure for considering cases in the courts on the imposition of an administrative fine.

Administrative punishment of legal entities as an administrative coercion measure

Administrative penalties applied to legal entities are among the most common and effective measures of administrative coercion. The analysis of the legislation made it possible to identify the system of administrative penalties applied to legal entities in the Russian Federation. The author characterizes the system and the main types of administrative penalties of legal entities, such as a warning, an administrative fine, confiscation, administrative suspension of activity. It is noted that the most common is an administrative fine. However, there are problems with its appointment. The materials of judicial practice on the application of administrative sanctions to legal entities are analyzed. As a result of the analysis, the need to optimize administrative penalties applied to legal entities is noted. The article examines the norms of the draft Administrative Code of the Russian Federation in relation to administrative penalties applied to legal entities. The positive and negative aspects of the proposed codification are noted.