Since the beginning of 2015, a new Code entered into force, which highlights innovations regarding administrative offenses of Russia with improvements and amendments. The Code is presented in a more detailed content and has new classifications in relation to the degree of offense. Also, the changes affected officials who are able to conduct administrative affairs. Here we consider only a few state bodies in whose competence administrative offenses in accordance with Art. 23 Administrative Code.
The content of the article
In accordance with Art. 23 Administrative Code regulated duties and scope of authority in the consideration of cases of administrative offenses.
The conditions for the consideration and conduct of processes for magistrates and arbitrators have been changed. The area of competence for employees of the commission on juvenile affairs has been increased, the activities of the Federal Service for Financial and Budgetary Control and its units, customs, ATS and other services responsible for the socio-economic spheres of the Russian Federation are regulated.
Judges
The actions and competence of judges are reflected in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (Article 23.1). We are talking about those administrative offenses, which are considered in the right of judges of various categories, including magistrates, arbitration and judges of military courts. Judges of general courts hear administrative cases, citizens, organizations arising from administrative relations. The list of articles corresponding to a certain category of judges is indicated in the approved Code. According to the article, an offender having a military duty and serving in a certain military unit will be held liable in a military garrison court, which is territorially related to this military deployment.
Arbitration judges are involved in resolving disputes of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs, they also have secured the articles of offenses reflected in this article. All other offenses may be considered by justices of the peace if they do not fall under the articles defined in the competence of other categories of judges.
Juveniles and CAO
The activities of the commission on juvenile affairs and the protection of their rights are regulated by part 2 of this article. In their competence is the consideration of all administrative cases involving minors. According to the comments to the article, violations under Articles 5.35, 5.34 and a number of articles of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation are also considered by this commission in addition to the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation on the work of their body.
In addition, violations of article 11, part 18, on stowaways, may also fall within the jurisdiction of the commission for minors and the protection of their rights if officials of air, rail, road and sea transport record an offense involving a minor.
ATS
The work of the internal affairs bodies (police) is regulated by article 23 part 3. The police performs the main functions in the territory of the state: conducting cases, monitoring the execution of sentences in the field of an administrative offense, and monitoring compliance with the laws of the Russian Federation. With these functions, the police performs the main task - it protects the honor and rights of citizens of the Russian Federation, foreigners and stateless persons located in the territory of the Russian Federation. Art. 23. 3 of the Administrative Offenses Code of the Russian Federation contains the delimitation of the jurisdiction of individual officials of the internal affairs bodies, that is, violations of the operation, construction of railway crossings and the roadway should be considered as part of the administrative case and only decisions should be made by the state traffic inspectors. Decisions made by other officials in these matters will be invalid.
Heads of duty shifts of linear police units are entitled to apply warnings and fines of up to two thousand rubles as sanctions in case of violation of the administrative nature. This should take into account the degree of responsibility that will comply with these lightest sanctions.
Bodies and institutions of the penal system
Institutions of the penitentiary system are allowed to apply measures in the field of administrative responsibility, although these are rather limited precedents for bringing to justice. Such precedents are resistance to citizens who have a court order, violation of discipline in prisons and during escort. When considering cases, officials who have the right to this procedure are identified. These are the heads of correctional institutions, colonies and houses of arrest and detention centers. The participation of other persons of the penal system is a violation of this law under Art. 23 Administrative Code with comments.
Tax authorities
Separate official units of the tax authorities are also entitled to conduct an administrative offense procedure. These include heads and their deputies of bodies at the federal level for taxes and duties, regional, regional and city values.
The main types of offenses are violations in the reporting, registration of legal and individual entrepreneurs, incorrect maintenance of financial statements and information provided to tax institutions.
Budget and financial sphere
The federal executive body, which exercises control and supervision functions in the financial and budgetary sphere, considers administrative cases under article 15, clauses 14, 15 and 16. By analogy with the tax authorities, officials on a territorial scale are identified who are able to investigate cases of administrative violations. These are the leaders and their deputies of this executive body. Decisions by other officials are illegal, but do not entail legal liability.
Customs
Customs authorities are divided into the Federal Customs Service (FCS), regional customs administrations, customs and customs posts. All together constitutes a single federal network. The actions of the customs authorities of Art. 23.8 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The service is accountable to the Government of the Russian Federation. The appointment of the head of the Federal Customs Service is also carried out by the Government of the Russian Federation. Heads and heads of regional departments are appointed by the head of the FCS. With regard to competence in the consideration of administrative cases, the highest official units are entitled to participate in the adoption of decisions, except for Article 16.1 (on concealment of goods from customs authorities).
Given the degree of danger and possible harm to health under this article, the consideration and decision of the decision is carried out by the judge. All senior management units can apply sanctions against offenders and draw up protocols with confiscation in accordance with the territorial distribution of powers, up to the heads of customs posts, if the offense is committed by individuals. Order of the Federal Customs Service of Russia dated 01.03.2012 No. 368 offers a list of customs officials who can draw up protocols and carry out detention with confiscation.
Export Control Bodies
Art. 23 Administrative Code introduces official duties in the field of administrative offenses. Currently, export control is carried out by the Federal Service for Technical and Export Control (FSTEC). Offenses under articles 14.20, 19.4.4, 19.5.2 are authorized to take control of heads, deputies of federal, regional scale and local significance. These provisions are reflected in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (Article 23). FSTEC is controlled by the Ministry of Defense, and its activities are controlled by the President of the Russian Federation. The director of the service appoints those persons who can draw up the minutes, if the offense involves confiscation, then such a case is referred to the arbitration court. Officials authorized to draw up protocols are allowed to inspect things on the territory of a legal entity or individual entrepreneur, vehicles, documents, seize property and seize it.
Border authorities
The Code of Administrative Offenses governs the actions of border authorities Art. 10/23. The border authorities are entrusted with the tasks of protecting and controlling the use of aquatic biological resources, licensing activities related to the use of the natural environment, as well as compliance with international treaties.
The officials who carry out administrative cases under the article include the head and his deputies of the federal executive body in the field of security, units in the field of border protection; chiefs and inspectors for the protection of marine biological objects, chiefs of border commandant's offices and border ships, captains of boats, as well as other management links. They are allowed to review offenses under articles on poaching, illegal fishing, unlicensed use of wildlife and marine biological objects, the extermination of rare species of animals and plants, inadequate protection of protected areas and territories of migratory animals. Official units of the border authorities are only entitled to warn or fine for violation. Punishments providing for the confiscation of the instruments of crime or expulsion of foreign citizens from the state are imposed only by decision of the judge.
Military commissariats
Military commissariats were created by decision of the Ministry of Defense in all territorial entities. Military commissars, heads of departments of military commissariats and their departments may consider administrative violations of rights. This is provided for by Art. 23 Administrative Code. The duties of military commissariats include primary military registration, measures for the implementation of military draft, control over the provision of military transport and mobilization forces. In case of violations in these areas of competence, the officials of the commissariat draw up a protocol and then submit it to a senior official for consideration of an administrative offense.
Bodies carrying out state sanitary and epidemiological surveillance
Case management on offenses is carried out by the chief sanitary doctors and their deputies in the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, cities and regions. The same powers are given to sanitary doctors in the field of executive power of the activities of the national guard of the Russian Federation, mobilization, especially dangerous industries and others. They consider cases in the field of violations of sanitary and epidemiological standards, violations of consumer rights.
CAO and ecology
The bodies exercising state environmental supervision are called upon to monitor the ecological state of the specially protected zones of the Russian Federation, monitor the production and reproduction of animal objects, engage in geological research and rational use of natural resources, and monitor marine objects. Rosprirodnadzor also controls the authorities with regard to the latter's use of water relations powers. Two services are distinguished: the federal service in the field of environmental management and the Federal service for environmental, technological and nuclear supervision.
Administrative violations require clear jurisdiction, but this still allows administrative cases to be dealt with by authorized persons of both services. Authorized persons include: the chief inspector for environmental protection of the Russian Federation, chief and senior inspectors in certain areas of protection, as well as deputies of the above officials.
State Inspectorate for Small Vessels
The bodies of the state inspection for small vessels are subordinate to the Ministry of Emergencies. The structure is designed to control the release, operation of small vessels, compliance with emission standards, noise level; the procedure for registering a small vessel and its use. Identified offenses in this area are entitled to be considered by authorized persons such as the chief state inspectors for small vessels of federal and regional significance and their deputies. The listed leaders may draw up protocols, however, in certain paragraphs specified in Art. 23 Administrative Code, the imposition of administrative punishment carried out without protocols.