The implementation of legislation acts as one of the key areas of law enforcement work. It comes down to solving problems to ensure the implementation of regulatory requirements and the protection of freedoms and interests of citizens throughout the country. This work is carried out according to the rules and within the limits established by the provisions of Federal Law No. 2202-I. Let us consider further what constitutes a prosecutor's response to a violation of the law.

general characteristics

Supervision over compliance with laws is also carried out by other government agencies. These include, in particular, tax, environmental, sanitary inspections, traffic police, and so on. However, all these structures exercise powers in specific areas and have areas under their control, the boundaries of which are clearly delineated by norms. The activities of the prosecutor's office are considered universal. Its powers extend to almost everything regulated by regulations.

Forms of prosecutorial response

The above Federal Law provides for special tools that can be used by officials as part of their work. Facilities prosecutor's response are applied in strict accordance with regulatory requirements. For each of them, special rules are established, adherence to which is the responsibility of employees. The norms provide for various These include protests, performances and other tools aimed at eliminating identified violations. In Art. 23-25.1 Federal Law No. 2202-I establishes the rules in accordance with which acts of prosecutorial response are approved and implemented. The implementation of any of the provided measures is a procedural procedure.

Protest

It is a procedural document. It is prepared directly by the prosecutor or his deputy. The protest is brought to the official or body that adopted the document that contradicts existing norms, to higher structures or employees, as well as to the court. In the latter case, procedural rules apply. The protest includes a demand to eliminate violations that the prosecutor's audit revealed in any part of the document or in its entirety, to bring it into compliance with the Federal Law, or to cancel it.

Features of compilation

Acts of prosecutorial response are usually drawn up in writing. The rules, however, provide for the possibility of verbal expression of protest. If it is drawn up in writing, it must contain mandatory details. These include:

1. The exact name of the structure to which the document is being submitted.
2. An act that, in the opinion of the prosecutor, does not comply with regulations.
3. The name of the norm, its provisions, with which the disputed document came into conflict. It also indicates the grounds on which the official draws conclusions about its illegality and makes a decision on the use of prosecutorial response measures.
4. Specific statement of requirements. When describing them, it is necessary to provide references to the rules governing the procedure for drawing up and considering a protest.
5. Signature of the applicant indicating class rank and position.

The norms impose requirements not only on the form of protest. Special attention is also given to the content of the protest. In it, the official reflects his conclusions. In particular, the employee indicates:

1. What exactly is the inconsistency/contradiction of the disputed document as a whole or part of it, in respect of which the impact is applied?
2. Proposal to eliminate the violation. Here the prosecutor expresses his position, cites specific actions that should express the elimination of contradictions or inconsistencies, and legal consequences.
3. The requirement to consider the submitted protest within a specified period. At the same time, references are provided to the norms regulating the procedure, and it is indicated that the response must be sent in writing immediately.

Performance

The use of this prosecutorial response measure is aimed at eliminating not only the violation of regulatory requirements, but also its causes, as well as the conditions conducive to its occurrence. Submissions must be reviewed promptly upon receipt. The addressee is an official or structure authorized to eliminate violations. The preparation of the submission is preceded by a prosecutor's check.

Document preparation

In the submission, the employee indicates:

1. The structure or official to whom the act is addressed.
2. Sources of information about violations committed.
3. Characteristics of actions/inactions that do not comply with regulations.
4. Analysis of the causes and conditions conducive to violations.
5. Requirements to eliminate inconsistencies, causes and circumstances that gave rise to them.
6. Links to deadlines and rules for reviewing submissions.

In the document, the prosecutor provides recommendations regarding measures to eliminate violations. They must have a legal orientation and not involve intrusion into the operational and economic activities of the subject. Recommendations for eliminating the circumstances and reasons that led to violations of a technical, organizational, managerial, or economic nature should be based on audit materials, opinions of experts and other specialists.

Among the requirements in the submission, it is possible to indicate the need to hold accountable specific employees who condoned illegal actions/inactions. Material and disciplinary punishments may be applied to them if the violation does not contain signs of an administrative offense or a criminal offense.

Resolution

It is considered one of the most popular tools in the practice of officials. The prosecutor makes decisions within various areas of his work, as well as during criminal proceedings. The adoption of the document is carried out, in particular, in the course of monitoring the implementation of regulatory requirements federal ministries, civil services, committees and other executive government bodies, representative and administrative structures of regional and local authorities, military command, control authorities, as well as their officials. To use this measure of prosecutorial response, the employee must have grounds. They are:

1. Initiation of administrative or criminal proceedings.
2. Release from custody of a subject who is unlawfully in a penal institution or an institution applying compulsory measures, who has been detained, placed in a forensic psychiatric institution, or pre-trial detention in violation of established rules.

The instructions contained in the document are subject to immediate implementation by the administration and bodies executing sentences against citizens who have been sentenced to non-custodial sentences. Within the framework of the pre-trial stages, he also has the right to make any procedural decision related to the case.

Prevention of violations

Another tool used by officials in the exercise of their powers is the prosecutor’s warning. It can be announced if there is information about an upcoming illegal act. The prosecutor's warning may be drawn up on his behalf or on behalf of his deputy. The use of this tool is the sole responsibility of these individuals. When carrying out the prevention of violations of regulatory requirements in the process of inquiry, consideration of cases in courts, and preliminary investigation, other measures of prosecutorial response must be applied. A warning is announced only when the employee has reliable information about impending illegal acts by officials that may cause Negative consequences for state, civil or public interests, but do not entail criminal liability.

Appeal

The prosecutor's warning may be challenged in court according to established rules. If it was not appealed or was not declared unlawful, and also if, within the specified period, the relevant association (religious or other public organization), its regional or other structural unit did not eliminate the violation that served as the basis for issuing a warning, these entities are subject to liquidation, and work is prohibited. A similar rule applies if, within a 12-month period from the date of announcement of the warning, new facts have been identified indicating the presence of signs of extremism in the functioning of societies.

Important point

The warning about the inadmissibility of violations of regulatory requirements applies exclusively to officials. It cannot be announced to organizations and citizens. The warning is drawn up in relation to employees of government agencies, local government structures, municipal and state institutions, military command units, military units and other formations. It can also be announced to managers and other employees of non-profit and commercial enterprises performing administrative, economic and organizational functions.

Additionally

The procedure for prosecutorial response stipulates that before issuing a warning about the inadmissibility of violations of regulatory requirements, information about impending illegal actions must be thoroughly investigated. In this case, written explanations must be required from the suspected officials. A warning is announced to the employee directly at the prosecutor's office against a signature. Warnings are announced based on the results of studying information, including requests and statements from citizens, regulatory structures, and other specific signals that contain reliable data about impending violations.

They are formalized in the form of special written prosecutorial acts. To increase the preventive effect and ensure publicity, a warning can be announced at the place where the suspect carries it out professional activity, including as part of the consideration of the results of audits and other control activities at a team meeting or when it is discussed by the collegial structure of the enterprise.

Conclusion

Prosecutor's response measures are considered specific tools for officials to exercise their powers. Their application has a special practical significance. These tools address various forms of regulatory violations. Prosecutorial measures are aimed at preventing and suppressing unlawful behavior of officials of various bodies, institutions and enterprises. The duties of officials include the timely acceptance of information for consideration and study. The analysis of incoming information must be comprehensive and objective. The scope of control is clearly limited by regulations.

In particular, it concerns the organizational, administrative and administrative functions of the subjects. This indicates that operational (current) activities are not affected by the measures provided for in the law. The demands of employees arise from their powers. The prosecutor is obliged to respond to all violations, to stop impending misconduct, since it must ensure control over the proper implementation of regulatory requirements. The structures under his jurisdiction include bodies carrying out preliminary investigations, operational investigative activities, and inquiries. The employee monitors compliance with standards by institutions executing punishment, applying coercive measures, and administrations of places where prisoners and detainees are kept.

All instructions of employees must be implemented within the established time frame. Regulatory acts provide for the liability of officials for deliberate evasion of the fulfillment of the demands of the prosecutor, which arise from his powers and are set out in warnings, representations, protests and other documents. For citizens, punishment is established in the form of a monetary penalty. Its size is 1-1.5 thousand rubles, for officials - 2-3 thousand rubles. Guilty subjects are held accountable under Art. 17.7 Code of Administrative Offences.

Based on the results of the inspection, when violations of laws on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds are identified, the prosecutor applies appropriate response measures: brings a protest, demands to change a regulatory legal act, makes a representation, sends a warning, issues a resolution to initiate a case of an administrative offense or send relevant materials to the investigative body for resolving the issue of criminal prosecution based on the facts of identified violations of criminal law, addresses statement of claim to court, arbitration court. When carrying out supervision, it is important to avoid mistakes associated with incorrect application of prosecutorial response measures: a) in a number of cases, based on the results of inspections, prosecutorial response measures are not applied or do not correspond to the identified violations; b) acts of prosecutorial response are drawn up formally, they briefly outline the identified violations, and do not properly disclose the circumstances contributing to them. Violations of the procedure established by law for applying prosecutorial response measures are allowed. For example, prosecutors initiate cases of administrative offenses under Art. 15.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, upon expiration of the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility. The decision to initiate a case of an administrative offense contains data that does not correspond to the actual circumstances of the case; in the reasoning part, a reference to inappropriate provisions of the law is allowed. Thus, the district prosecutor in his resolution regarding LLC “N.” indicated that the organization had not appointed a special official responsible for compliance with internal control rules, while the materials contained a copy of the order of the director of LLC “N.” on the appointment of such a person, which is issued before the prosecutor makes a decision. In another case, the prosecutor’s resolution states that “the actions of a legal entity constitute a crime under Art. 15.27 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.” In violation of the provisions of Art. 28.2, 28.4 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation to an official or representative of a legal entity against whom a case has been initiated for an administrative offense under Art. 15.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a copy of the prosecutor’s decision to initiate a case is not handed over. Prosecutors pay insufficient attention to the quality of the case materials being prepared, to which are attached documents that are not related to the offense committed or are not certified copies. In a number of cases, explanations from officials are taken before the initiation of a case of an administrative offense, which neutralizes their evidentiary value. As a result, the territorial departments of Rosfinmonitoring return administrative materials to prosecutors due to the presence of significant violations that could not be eliminated during preparation for the consideration of the case; c) to ensure legality, the entire range of prosecutorial response measures provided for by law is not used; prosecutors are limited to issuing one act without considering the possibility of using a set of measures in necessary cases; d) in a number of cases, the application of response measures does not achieve a positive effect, their effectiveness is not assessed, prosecutors do not respond to the facts of delay in execution, ignoring their demands, no measures are taken to restore violated rights; e) when identifying an offense containing a sign of a criminal law nature, as a result of which money or other property was obtained (the main crime), prosecutors often do not monitor possible financial transactions or other transactions with property committed for the purpose of legalizing criminal proceeds, which create the appearance of legal ownership , use and disposal of them. And such improperly verified materials are sometimes sent to the investigative body, where legalization is also not always detected. To prevent such errors, the choice of response measure should be based on a legal assessment of the materials collected during the inspection process, which allows us to determine the most effective means of prosecutorial supervision in a given situation, which will help eliminate and prevent violations of laws. Acts of prosecutorial response must be issued in a timely and prompt manner; they set out the legal essence, as well as the negative consequences of violations of the law, the reasons and conditions that contributed to this, and raise the question of their elimination and the responsibility of the perpetrators. If necessary, prosecutors take part in the consideration of issued acts of response. It should be noted that the result prosecutorial activities there must be not only the identification and elimination of violations of the law, but also their prevention, for which acts of prosecutorial response must have a preventive orientation. We must strive to combine supervisory actions with measures to strengthen law and order in the economic sphere, taken by government bodies, and use materials from criminal, civil, arbitration and administrative cases for preventive purposes. When introducing acts of response, the prosecutor needs to assess the possible negative consequences of fulfilling the requirements presented to them, taking into account that acts of response should not be aimed at destroying existing legal relations in the field of combating money laundering, but at correcting them and bringing them into compliance with current legislation. When exercising supervision, it is important to correctly determine the addressee of the prosecutor’s response act. This should be a person at the appropriate level who has the authority to eliminate identified violations of the law. It must be taken into account that supervision over the implementation of laws by federal government bodies is carried out by the Prosecutor General's Office Russian Federation . It should be excluded that prosecutors of constituent entities of the Russian Federation submit acts of response directly to the heads of such bodies as, for example, Rosfinmonitoring. If there is a need to appeal to government authorities at the federal level, the draft prosecutorial response act and copies of documents confirming its validity are submitted by the prosecutor's offices of the constituent entities to the appropriate unit of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation. The rights of entrepreneurs and citizens suffer to the greatest extent when normative legal acts are adopted that do not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws on combating money laundering. The prosecutor must immediately respond to all facts of the adoption of such regulatory legal acts by filing protests. The basis for a protest is the inconsistency of a legal act with the law or other regulatory legal act (for example, mitigation or exclusion of requirements for the implementation of mandatory internal control procedures); violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, organizations, and other persons in the field of business and other economic activities (for example, unjustified expansion of the powers of state control bodies to conduct inspections and bring violators to justice), illegal imposition of any responsibilities for the implementation of internal control; creation of other obstacles to entrepreneurial and other economic activities. The prosecutor or his deputy brings a protest against a legal act contrary to the law to the body or official who issued this act, or to a higher body or higher official, or goes to court. The protest must contain a statement of the provisions of the legal act that do not comply with or contradict the laws on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds, which particular law they contradict; a requirement to bring the act into compliance with federal law or to repeal it, indicating how the violation should be eliminated. After filing a protest, it is necessary to control the situation until the regulatory legal acts are finally brought into compliance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and laws on combating money laundering, and to achieve real implementation of the stated requirements. In cases where public authorities disagree with the position of the prosecutor or delay the issue of bringing a normative legal act into compliance with the law on combating money laundering, the prosecutor should apply to the arbitration court with applications to challenge normative legal acts affecting the rights and legitimate interests of organizations and citizens in the field of business and other economic activities. When filing such an application in court, you must be guided by the provisions of Art. 52, 191 - 196 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, regulating proceedings in cases arising from public legal relations. When establishing facts indicating corruption on the part of officials government agencies, performing duties to control the conduct of transactions with funds or other property, as well as when identifying regulations of these bodies that contain signs of corruption, the materials are sent to the divisions of the prosecutor's office that supervise the implementation of anti-corruption laws, for decision-making in in accordance with their competence. If corruption-related factors are identified in a normative legal act, the prosecutor submits to the body, organization or official that issued this act a demand to change the normative legal act or goes to court. The requirement must contain a description of the provisions of the regulatory legal act that contain corruption-inducing factors, reasons to believe that they directly or indirectly allow or provoke manifestations of corruption; proposing a way to eliminate identified corruption factors. If gaps or inconsistencies are found in current legislation on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds, the prosecutor is authorized to submit to legislative bodies and bodies with the right of legislative initiative proposals to amend, supplement, repeal or adopt laws and other normative legal acts. If there is any discrepancy between the decisions of the Government of the Russian Federation and the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws, or imperfections in federal legislation, the materials are submitted to the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation. The most frequently used measure of prosecutorial response to identified violations of anti-money laundering laws by prosecutors is a presentation. Based on the results of the inspection, it is submitted by the prosecutor or his deputy to the body or official authorized to eliminate the violations committed, and is subject to immediate consideration. When making of this act The prosecutor's response must take into account the prevalence of offenses in supervised government bodies and organizations that carry out transactions with funds or other property. In a number of organizations, violation of laws on combating money laundering is becoming an established practice, in others it manifests itself in individual shortcomings or omissions on the part of management and employees. Having identified individual offenses, the prosecutor gives a description of them, indicating the sources of information and demands their elimination and prevention in the future. Along with this, the question of disciplinary liability of officials may be raised. If the offenses are widespread, the prosecutor must, in addition to describing the violations of the law, indicate the circumstances contributing to the offenses and present reasonable proposals for eliminating them, for example, training employees, modifying internal control rules. In his recommendations, the prosecutor should not interfere with the management activities of state control bodies or the economic activities of organizations. Proposals to eliminate the circumstances that contributed to violations of the law must be legal and based on the conclusions of specialists, materials of inspections and audits. Violations of the law may be facilitated by the long-term failure to adopt the regulatory legal acts provided for by federal legislation on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds, which is also the basis for making a submission. The reason for non-acceptance may be violations committed by employees of government agencies during the preparation of draft regulations, for example, red tape. Having identified such violations, the prosecutor must raise the issue of bringing the guilty officials to disciplinary liability. In cases where a government body (official) has not taken measures within the established time frame to bring into conformity with federal legislation a normative legal act issued (adopted) by it, recognized by the court as contrary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws or other normative legal act of great legal significance force, the prosecutor makes a presentation to the head of the body on the fact of non-execution of a court decision that has entered into legal force. In order to prevent illegal actions, a warning about the inadmissibility of violating the law is used, which is a means of individual preventive influence on officials prone to violating laws on combating money laundering. The warning must contain specific reasons to believe that the committed violations or established practices will contribute to future violations of the law; measures to eliminate violations. It should be taken into account that a warning is applied when the law has not yet been violated, but the information available to the prosecutor gives reason to believe (for example, the preparation of a draft normative act) that an offense may be committed if preventive measures are not taken in a timely manner. The basis for warning an official can only be reliable information about impending illegal acts, therefore, the application of warnings may be preceded by verification of such information with a request for written explanations from officials. The prosecutor must decide to apply a warning only taking into account the legal assessment of the results of the inspections carried out, based on statements and appeals from citizens, information from regulatory authorities and other specific signals containing reliable information about impending illegal acts. A warning to an official may be sent to the addressee or announced against signature at the prosecutor's office. In order to increase the preventive impact, the prosecutor may announce a warning at the official’s place of work. A warning, in combination with other legal means, can improve the effectiveness of the response. In case of failure to comply with the requirements presented in the acts of prosecutorial response, the prosecutor, in accordance with Art. 198 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation has the right to apply to the arbitration court with an application to invalidate non-normative legal acts, illegal decisions and actions (inaction) of state bodies, local government bodies, other bodies, officials related to the implementation of laws on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds. This measure of prosecutorial response is applied if the contested non-normative legal act, decision and action (inaction) do not comply with the law or other regulatory legal act and violate the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, organizations, other persons in the field of business and other economic activities, and illegally impose on them any obligations create other obstacles to the implementation of entrepreneurial and other economic activities. An application may be submitted to the arbitration court within three months from the day the prosecutor became aware of the violation of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and legal entities. When preparing an application, it is necessary to keep in mind that those mentioned in Art. 198 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, other bodies are not government bodies, but are vested with authority in the field government controlled and make decisions that are binding for the persons in respect of whom they are made (for example, the Bank of Russia). It should be taken into account that Art. 198 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for challenging decisions and actions (inaction) of management bodies of organizations and their associations, as well as their leaders. At the same time, such cases can be considered according to the rules of claim proceedings in civil process. In accordance with Art. 45 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the prosecutor has the right to apply to the court in defense of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens, an indefinite number of persons or the interests of the Russian Federation, if organizations do not comply with the requirements of laws on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds. For example, the prosecutor of the city of Prokopyevsk, Kemerovo region, sent six applications to the court to impose on organizations the obligation to develop internal control rules, four of which were satisfied and executed, in two cases the proceedings were terminated due to the voluntary satisfaction of the prosecutor’s demands. If there is data reliably indicating that transactions made by legal entities in the authorized capital (fund) of which there is a share of participation of the Russian Federation, a share of participation of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, a share of participation municipalities, are associated with the laundering of criminal proceeds, the prosecutor has the right to apply to the arbitration court with a claim to apply the consequences of the invalidity of a void transaction. Reliable data on the laundering of criminal proceeds can be obtained from a court verdict, including a foreign one, or a decision to terminate a criminal case on non-rehabilitative grounds. Having identified violations of the legislation on combating the legalization of criminal proceeds, the prosecutor initiates a case of an administrative offense under Art. 15.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (failure to comply with the requirements of the legislation on combating the legalization (laundering) of proceeds from crime and the financing of terrorism). In most cases, the reason for initiating a case of an administrative offense is the direct discovery by the prosecutor of sufficient data indicating the existence of an administrative offense event. Materials with signs of an administrative offense under Art. 15.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, may also come from state control bodies. The prosecutor must issue a decision to initiate a case immediately after discovering that an administrative offense has been committed. If additional clarification of the circumstances of the case or information about individual or information about a legal entity in respect of which a case of an administrative offense is being initiated, a decision is made within two days from the moment the administrative offense is detected. The decision cannot be made after one year from the date of commission of the administrative offense under Art. 15.27 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. When deciding whether to initiate a case of an administrative offense, it is necessary to take into account that, as provided for in Part 1 of Art. 15.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, violation of the deadlines for filing an application for registration with the authorized body and (or) the deadlines for sending internal control rules for approval to the authorized (supervisory) body is not a continuing offense. The statute of limitations for bringing administrative liability in these cases must be calculated from the moment the relevant obligation becomes due. Meanwhile, the period for appointing a special official responsible for compliance with internal control rules is not regulated by law, which makes the failure to appoint such a person a continuing offense. The prosecutor's decision on an administrative offense under Art. 15.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, is sent to Rosfinmonitoring or its territorial departments within three days from the date of issue. The shortcomings of the resolution and other materials of the case of an administrative offense are eliminated within no more than three days from the date of their receipt (receipt) from Rosfinmonitoring. The materials of the case of an administrative offense with amendments made to them are returned within 24 hours from the day the relevant deficiencies are eliminated. Having identified violations of the law when Rosfinmonitoring brought legal entities and officials to administrative responsibility, the prosecutor lodges a protest against the decision in the case of an administrative offense and (or) subsequent decisions on complaints against this decision. Based on the results of the inspection, the prosecutor, along with the application of the considered response measures, sends information about identified violations of the law to state control bodies in order to bring violators to justice or resolve the issue of liquidating the organization in judicial procedure. Based on the results of the application of response measures, the prosecutor must verify the actual elimination of violations of the laws. It is necessary to ensure the receipt of reports on the results of consideration of acts of prosecutorial response, to assess the extent of changes made to the regulatory legal acts, improving law enforcement so that such improvements are not ostentatious, formal. In case of failure to comply with the legal and justified demands of the prosecutor, the question of initiating a case on an administrative offense provided for in Article 17.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (failure to comply with the legal requirements of the prosecutor, investigator, inquiry officer or official conducting proceedings in the case of an administrative offense) should be raised. In the process of monitoring the implementation of laws in the economy, offenses with signs of a crime associated with the receipt of significant income may be identified. However, during the inspection, suspected persons, through various transactions and financial transactions, often manage to hide property acquired as a result of an illegal act. Injured government bodies and legal entities do not always promptly take measures to protect property from attacks and compensate for damage. Therefore, in such cases, the prosecutor, with the participation of specialists, needs to find out the size of the property or Money acquired as a result of committing an act with signs of a crime; what transactions and financial transactions were made with this property or funds, whether they were used in business or other economic activities. In addition, the prosecutor should determine the location of property or cash, accounts to which non-cash funds are transferred; identify all participants in transactions, the new owner of this property or funds; take measures to ensure the return of state or municipal property to the owner or the recovery of amounts of unjust enrichment in favor of the state. Depending on the degree of reliability of the information about the criminal origin of the money, the prosecutor organizes a further inspection or sends the materials to the investigative body to initiate a criminal case and conduct an investigation. To increase the effectiveness of the application of prosecutorial response measures, prosecutors coordinate the activities of law enforcement agencies with the involvement of state financial control bodies, for which interdepartmental working groups are created that on an ongoing basis collect and analyze information on the state of implementation of legislation on combating money laundering. Based on the results of the work of such groups, it is possible to adopt instructions on strengthening prosecutorial supervision in this area, preparing methodological recommendations for conducting inspections, and applying prosecutorial response measures.

More on the topic Prosecutor's response measures:

1. 92. What prosecutorial response measures does the prosecutor have the right to apply?
2. § 4. Acts of prosecutorial response to identified violations of the law
3. CASSATION PROTEST AS AN ACT OF PROSECUTORAL RESPONSE TO VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW BY THE COURT WHEN PASSING A SENTENCE
4. T o m e 11. PROSECUTORAL SUPERVISION OVER THE EXECUTION OF LAWS BY THE ADMINISTRATIONS OF BODIES AND INSTITUTIONS EXECUTING PUNISHMENTS AND COMPULSIVE MEASURES APPOINTED BY THE COURT, ADMINISTRATIONS OF PLACES OF CONTENT OF DETAINED AND PRISONED IN Custody
5. § 4. Prosecutor's supervision over the legality of bringing persons as accused, detaining suspects and applying preventive measures in the form of detention to suspects and accused
6. Measures of care for children, dependents of a suspect or accused and measures to ensure the safety of his property (Article 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation).
7. 2.1.3. Building an effective complaint response system

The Federal Law “On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation” contains an exhaustive list of measures of prosecutorial response to identified offenses, which must be fully applied in cases of violations of laws in the economic sphere. The prosecutor exercises the powers granted to him to identify and eliminate violations of the rights of entrepreneurs through acts of prosecutorial response.

Acts of prosecutorial response are forms provided by law for exercising the powers of the prosecutor to eliminate and prevent offenses.

Being provided for by law, acts of prosecutorial response are procedural in nature. They are compiled in a certain form and entered into certain addressees. The law determines the procedure for submitting and considering acts of prosecutorial response, the rights and responsibilities of the prosecutor and the persons considering these acts.

The acts of the prosecutor's response must set out the essence of the offense, its negative consequences, the reasons and conditions that contributed to its commission. The Law on the Prosecutor's Office provides for four types of acts of prosecutorial response: protest, presentation, resolution and warning.

1. Protest of the prosecutor.

This is the most common means of prosecutorial response. In accordance with the Federal Law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation", the prosecutor or his deputy brings a protest against a legal act contrary to the law to the body or official who issued this act, or to a higher body or higher official, or goes to court in the manner prescribed by the procedural legislation of the Russian Federation.

2. Presentation of the prosecutor.

In accordance with Article 24 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, a proposal is made to eliminate violations of the law. Under violation of the law in in this case should be understood as individual facts of an offense in the form of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of the requirements of the law or the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and repeated homogeneous generalized facts of offenses.

The submission indicates not only the offenses committed, their causes and conditions that contributed to their commission, but also the prosecutor’s proposals on measures and activities, the implementation of which is necessary to eliminate these causes and conditions.

3. Prosecutor's resolution.

In accordance with the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, the prosecutor can make two types of decisions: a) to initiate a criminal case; b) to initiate proceedings regarding an administrative offense.

The general, mandatory requirement imposed by law on these decisions is their motivation. This means that when making decisions, the prosecutor must be convinced that the identified offense contains either signs of a crime or signs of an administrative offense. This conviction must be reflected in the reasoning part of the decisions.

4. Warning about the inadmissibility of violating the law.

In order to prevent offenses and if there is information about impending illegal acts, the prosecutor or his deputy sends in writing to officials, and if there is information about impending illegal acts containing signs extremist activities, leaders of public (religious) associations and other persons are warned against violating the law.

This act of prosecutorial supervision as a form of exercising the powers of the prosecutor was established by the amendment to the Law on the Prosecutor's Office of February 10, 1999.

In addition to the acts of prosecutorial supervision provided for by the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, in practice there are cases of prosecutors using other, atypical means of prosecutorial response. For example, prosecutors of some constituent entities of the federation, in their supervisory activities, when identifying violations of laws in legal acts, do not take the response measures provided for by the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, but are limited to only informing the offender. They replace the acts of response provided for by the law on the prosecutor's office with quasi-protests or quasi-representations. For example, the prosecutor of the Republic of Mari El replaces the filing of protests with “sending proposals.” Identical prosecutorial practice is observed in the city of Moscow, where, in order to “settle certain issues, as well as in cases of inconsistency of city laws with the requirements of federal legislation, proposals were sent to the Moscow City Duma, and, if there are grounds, appropriate acts of prosecutorial response.” Some prosecutors notified the addressee of the identified violations by letter. Thus, on April 28, 1998, the acting prosecutor of the Leningrad region sent a letter to the head of the Legislative Assembly of the Leningrad region, in which he notified that the prosecutor’s office had conducted a legal analysis of the regional law “On elections of bodies and officials of local self-government of the Leningrad region” for compliance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Federal electoral legislation. A number of norms contained in the regional law, in the opinion of the prosecutor, did not comply with the Federal Law “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation.” When sending such a letter, the prosecutor must take into account that it may not give rise to any legal consequences. The prosecutor, by sending a letter, only imitates his protest activity.

Chapter 3. Prosecutor's response measures

Taking prosecutorial response measures to violations of laws is the prerogative of chief prosecutors and their deputies. At the same time, a feature of the area of ​​supervisory activity under consideration is that prosecutors use the means of prosecutorial response, enshrined in Art. 22 of the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation”, and in Art. 25.11 and ch. 30 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. The continued growth in violations in the field of legislation on administrative offenses in 2008 (by 13.3%, to 568.2 thousand) led to an intensification of the activities of prosecutors. 137.6 thousand protests were brought (+8.7%), the vast majority of which were satisfied, 16.2 thousand submissions were made. At the initiative of prosecutors, more than 8.6 thousand perpetrators were brought to disciplinary and 321.1 thousand (+17.5%) to administrative liability, 3.7 thousand officials were warned about the inadmissibility of violating the law, 340 people who were illegally subjected to administrative detention by non-judicial authorities, 480 materials were sent to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution in accordance with clause 2 of part 2 of art. 37 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The number of claims (applications) sent to the courts increased by 1.8% (up to 11.8 thousand) in the amount of 8.4 million rubles; of those considered by the court, 7.8 thousand claims were satisfied in the amount of 8.1 million rubles . (the rest were under review). Below we will discuss the reasons for using some prosecutorial response measures.

1. Resolution to initiate proceedings in the case

This power of the prosecutor follows from paragraph 1 of Art. 25 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office and Part 1 of Art. 25.11 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. It needs to be considered in relation to the area under study from two positions. Firstly, if during the inspection the prosecutor revealed that an official of the administrative jurisdiction body within the framework of Art. 28.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a decision was made to terminate the proceedings in the case of an administrative offense, while the circumstances listed in Art. 24.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, he has the right, if the deadline for bringing a person to administrative responsibility has not expired, to issue a resolution to initiate proceedings in a case of an administrative offense in compliance with the requirements of Art. 28.2 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Moreover, in the cases provided for in Art. 28.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the prosecutor may initiate an administrative investigation into the commission of an administrative offense with the transfer of materials to the administrative jurisdiction body authorized to carry out such actions. Secondly, the prosecutor can initiate proceedings in a case of an administrative offense against officials of bodies of administrative jurisdiction. Article 17.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes the liability of officials for deliberate failure to comply with the requirements of the prosecutor arising from his powers established by federal law. Therefore, in cases where the prosecutor’s demands based on paragraph 1 of Art. 22 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office are ignored by an official of the administrative jurisdiction body or when obstacles are created to the prosecutor in the exercise of supervisory powers and there is every reason to believe that such actions (inaction) are intentional, the prosecutor must, having selected an explanation, make a decision to initiate proceedings in the case of administrative offense against the relevant official of the administrative jurisdiction body and in accordance with Art. 28.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the deadlines for sending materials to the magistrate (where there are no magistrates, to the district court) at the location of the administrative jurisdiction body. It should be noted that, as before, violations of the norms of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation when bringing citizens to administrative responsibility, in addition to those mentioned above, are common in customs and tax authorities vested with administrative jurisdiction, in commissions for minors, as well as in fire inspection authorities. Analysis of the state of legality, administrative practice and prosecutorial supervision in the field of implementation of legislation on fire safety at social facilities, carried out by the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation, indicates that prosecutors of the Krasnodar, Altai territories, Voronezh, Tambov, Kurgan, Kostroma, Rostov, Sakhalin and Volgograd regions are actively using the powers to initiation of administrative proceedings against those guilty of violating fire safety rules. For example, in some regional medical institutions in the Sakhalin region, the premises were not equipped with fire alarm systems, evacuation routes were lined with flammable materials, wooden roof structures were not treated with a fire retardant compound; in this regard, prosecutors initiated administrative proceedings against the heads of institutions under Art. 20.4 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. The perpetrators were brought to administrative liability in the form of a fine. The Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation submitted a proposal to the Chief State Inspector of the Russian Federation for fire supervision to eliminate these and other identified violations. Based on the results of its consideration, the leadership of the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations instructed the heads of the regional centers of the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations to strengthen control over the work of territorial bodies. The heads of these bodies are instructed to analyze the activities of their subordinates and consider the results at the boards. The activities of officials of administrative jurisdiction bodies should also be considered through the prism of Art. 19.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which establishes responsibility for arbitrariness.

2. Representation of eliminating violations of laws

The implementation of this power occurs within the framework established by Art. 24 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office. The basis for the adoption of this measure of prosecutorial response is information verified by the prosecutor about the incorrect application of substantive law and (or) non-compliance by officials of the administrative jurisdiction body with the procedural requirements of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, including the requirements: on the procedure for filing decisions that have entered into legal force in cases of administrative offenses for execution, on jurisdiction, and also based on specific circumstances - on the procedure for proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, compliance with the rights of participants in proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, on the application of measures to ensure proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, on the procedure for initiating cases of administrative offenses , on the grounds for terminating proceedings in a case of an administrative offense, on the procedure for revising decisions in cases of administrative offenses, etc. The prosecutor is obliged to respond in the event of revealing facts of inaction on the part of officials of administrative jurisdiction bodies, when the latter unreasonably do not take administrative measures provided for by procedural legislation prosecution of persons who have committed offenses and enforcement of decisions in cases of administrative offenses. In the above and other cases, the prosecutor reacts by making a proposal to eliminate violations of laws. At the same time, a representation can and should be made on the basis of violations to which the prosecutor responded by issuing a resolution on the release of a person detained administratively by decision of the administrative jurisdiction, filing a protest against an illegal decision in a case of an administrative offense, as well as in cases of non-compliance by officials bodies of administrative jurisdiction of the prosecutor's demands arising from the powers established by federal laws that are directly related to the area in question. Ideas about eliminating violations of laws in proceedings in cases of administrative offenses may be individual or generalized character. In the first case, the basis for making a submission is the information confirmed during the inspection received by the prosecutor's office (a citizen's complaint, an appeal from another person, a message in the media). mass media etc.) the fact of isolated violations of the requirements of the law by officials of the administrative jurisdiction body. In the second case, the basis for the prosecutor’s response is, as a rule, violations of laws identified during a scheduled or unscheduled (in connection with received information, on the instructions of a superior prosecutor, on his own initiative) inspections, including violations of laws, including the execution of decisions in cases of administrative offenses. When determining the addressee of the submitted submission, it is necessary to proceed from the fact that, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 24 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, a proposal to eliminate violations of laws is submitted by the prosecutor or his deputy to the body or official who is authorized to eliminate the violations committed. If we are talking about the eradication of illegal practices in a specific body of administrative jurisdiction, then the prosecutor addresses the submission to the head of such body. In cases where previously made submissions and other acts of prosecutorial response did not have their effect, it is lawful to raise the issue about this with the management superior to such a body. That's why in the operative part of the submission it is necessary to set such requirements as: mandatory disciplinary punishment up to and including dismissal of officials who have shown themselves to be the worst, including in some cases the head of the relevant body of administrative jurisdiction; improvements to the level check system professional knowledge for persons admitted to administrative prosecution; eliminating the causes and conditions that contributed to violations of the law. It is also necessary to formulate the question of unconditionally sending to the prosecutor's office copies of orders indicating that specific measures have been taken to eliminate violations of laws, the reasons and conditions conducive to them. In this case, it is necessary to keep in mind the instruction of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation dated 02.02.2007 No. 73/1-33-2007 on the exclusion of facts of sending requests and acts of prosecutorial response to federal government bodies, bypassing the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia.

3. Protest against the decision on the case
about an administrative offense

Clause 3, Part 1, Art. 25.11 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation gives the prosecutor, within the limits of his powers, the right to lodge a protest against a decision in a case of an administrative offense, regardless of participation in the case. Article 29.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes two types of such resolutions: 1) a resolution on the imposition of an administrative penalty; 2) a decision to terminate proceedings in a case of an administrative offense. A decision to terminate proceedings in a case of an administrative offense may be made in the event of: the presence of at least one of the circumstances precluding proceedings in the case, provided for in Art. 24.5; announcing an oral reprimand to the perpetrator in accordance with Art. 2.9 of the Code; termination of proceedings in the case and transfer of case materials to the prosecutor, the preliminary investigation body or the inquiry body if the actions (inaction) contain signs of a crime. Here you should take into account the specifics enshrined in Chapter. 30 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, procedures for reviewing resolutions and decisions in cases of administrative offenses. Yes, Art. 30.2 of the Code establishes the procedure for filing a complaint against a decision in a case of an administrative offense, which is also applicable to cases of protest by the prosecutor. In this case, the prosecutor may, at his own discretion, send a protest to the body of administrative jurisdiction that adopted the relevant decision, or directly challenge the illegal decision to the court or to a superior person authorized to consider it. It is advisable to use the procedure of direct appeal to the body (court, official) authorized to consider the protest. This, firstly, will save time, which would otherwise be occupied by the procedure for further correspondence between the body of administrative jurisdiction whose decision is being challenged and the body (court) authorized to review the contested decision. Secondly, appealing directly to a higher authority is more acceptable from a logical point of view, since otherwise the protest is addressed to a body that does not have the right to consider it on its merits and make a decision based on the law. Clause 1 of Art. 23 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office also corresponds to this position, giving the right to the prosecutor or his deputy to bring a protest against an illegal legal act to a higher body or higher official. Article 30.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation determines the bodies and officials to whom the protest is addressed, and Art. 30.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes that a complaint, as well as a protest against a decision in a case of an administrative offense, can be filed within 10 days from the date of delivery or receipt of a copy of the decision. Thus, the legislator has established two starting points for appealing decisions in cases of administrative offenses, as well as for protesting, since
Part 1 Art. 30.10 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation contains a direct reference to Art. 30.1 – 30.3 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Since the prosecutor is in fact unable to ensure a complete verification of all decisions taken within his territorial or object jurisdiction that have not entered into legal force, both judicial and non-judicial bodies, the main emphasis in his work should be given to challenging the supervisory procedure entered into legal force decisions. It should be noted that according to Federal Law dated December 3, 2008 No. 240-FZ Art. 30.11 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation has lost force. The same Law introduced new articles into the Code. 30.12 – 30.19, regulating the procedure for appeals and protests by way of supervision resolutions in a case of an administrative offense, decisions based on the results of consideration of complaints, protests. The provisions of these articles extend the right to appeal by way of supervision of decisions in a case of an administrative offense that have entered into legal force, decisions based on the results of consideration of complaints, protests against persons specified in Art. 25.1 – 25.5 of the Code. For convenience, it is recommended to follow the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 30.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which determines what type of decision can be made based on the results of consideration of a complaint (protest). The prosecutor has the right to lodge a protest against a decision in a case of an administrative offense in cases where: a) there is at least one of the circumstances provided for in Art. 24.5Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Article 2.9 of the Code, to which reference is made in the norm in question, establishes that if the administrative offense committed is insignificant, the judge, body, official authorized to resolve the case of an administrative offense may release the person who committed the administrative offense from administrative liability and limit himself to an oral remark. The circumstances specified in this article cannot be placed not only by the prosecutor, but also by the person appealing the decision, as the motivational basis for their claims, since it does not contain the element of obligation to be guided by certain considerations, which presupposes the personal discretion of an authorized person or body to apply such a rule. On the contrary, Art. 24.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation provides an exhaustive list of circumstances excluding proceedings in a case of an administrative offense. In the motivational part of the protest, one should refer to one of the given grounds, and in the operative part, the question should be raised about cancellation of the illegal decision and termination of proceedings in the case. The reasoning part of the protest may be based on the fact that the circumstances on the basis of which the contested decision was made were not proven. The prosecutor proceeds from the provisions of Art. 26.1 of the Administrative Code, listing the circumstances to be clarified in the case of an administrative offense; b) the procedural requirements provided for by the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation have been significantly violated, if this did not allow a comprehensive, complete and objective consideration of the case, as well as in connection with the need to apply the law on an administrative offense, entailing the imposition of a more severe administrative penalty. In the reasoning part of the protest, it is necessary to indicate exactly what significant violations of the procedural requirements of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation did not allow a comprehensive, complete and objective consideration of the case, or why the law on an administrative offense should be applied, entailing the imposition of a more severe punishment. In the operative part of the response act, the prosecutor raises the question of canceling the decision and returning the case for a new trial; c) the decision was made by an unauthorized judge, body or official. The prosecutor motivates his position with reference to the norms of the Code on the jurisdiction to consider cases of administrative offenses, and in the operative part he raises the question of canceling the decision and sending the case for consideration according to jurisdiction. The given link to Art. 30.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of protests brought by the prosecutor most fully contributes to the goals of prosecutorial response, the eradication of simplification that is still present in the work, and increasing the responsibility of prosecutors for the quality of the acts of response they prepare. In Art. 31.6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the basis for suspending the execution of a resolution is only the prosecutor's protest on a decision that has entered into legal force in a case of an administrative offense before considering the protest. Thus, based on the requirements of Art. 30.12 of the Administrative Code, it is necessary to ensure synchronicity in the process of bringing such protest prosecutor of a constituent entity of the Federation or his deputy addressed to the chairman (deputy chairman) of the court corresponding to their level and in notification court or administrative jurisdiction body that issued a contested decision in a case of an administrative offense to suspend its execution pending consideration of the protest. It is preferable to deal with the issue of notification to the prosecutor who discovered the violation at the location of the administrative jurisdiction body that issued the decision. At the same time, maximum consistency should be achieved in decision-making by district and regional prosecutors.

It seems necessary to note that in more detail the issues of reviewing decisions that have entered into legal force in a case of an administrative offense, decisions based on the results of consideration of complaints, protests are provided for by new Art. 30.12 – 30.13 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. From these norms it follows main conclusion that a decision in a case of an administrative offense that has entered into legal force, decisions based on the results of consideration of complaints, protests can only be reviewed in court. At the same time, the types of administrative offenses and punishments do not matter, as well as who was a participant in the proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, which bodies and officials made these resolutions and decisions.

In addition, established by Part 1 of Art. 30.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation the right to appeal in the manner of supervision by the persons specified in Art. 25.1 – 25.5 of the Code, decisions in the case of an administrative offense that entered into force, decisions based on the results of consideration of complaints, protests restored the constitutional principle provided for in Art. 46 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation - the right to judicial protection. The norms introduced into the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation specifically establish the procedural forms of decisions taken to review decisions that have entered into legal force, decisions in a case of an administrative offense, and the limits of such a decision. In Art. 30.15 – 30.18 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, they are set out in detail.

It must be emphasized that according to Art. 22 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, in the event of detection of illegal legal acts, the prosecutor or his deputy protests the legal acts that contradict the law. If the authorities that issued such acts refuse to cancel them, the prosecutor appeals with an application to a court or arbitration court on the recognition of such acts as invalid
(Article 45 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 52 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

4. Disclaimer
violations of the law

In Part 1 of Art. 25 1 of the Law on the Prosecutor's Office stipulates that a warning about the inadmissibility of violating the law is announced to an official in for crime prevention purposes. That is, in its essence, this means of prosecutorial supervision cannot be recognized as an act of response to identified violations in the literal sense of the word. At the same time, as an analysis of the practice of prosecutors using this article shows, warnings are often announced after violations of laws have been committed, and not when there is information about impending illegal acts. Of course, this practice is not correct and is subject to adjustment, since caution as a preventive measure does not achieve its goal, which is why its value is extremely low. In the process of monitoring the legality of decisions made by bodies of administrative jurisdiction, it is permissible to practice issuing warnings to officials of such bodies when single-order violations on their part are revealed over a long period, which gives grounds to talk about their sustainable nature and the possibility of repetition in law enforcement practice. In conclusion, it should be noted that due to the limited volume of the manual, it is impossible to cover the entire aspect of emerging issues and ways to resolve them. Of course, taking into account the nature of the work presented, it did not reflect the different points of view of scientists, authors of comments on the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation on the most pressing issues, since the final decision still remains with the court. At the same time, without claiming to be exhaustive in the information presented, including in terms of the methodology for conducting inspections, the work reflects issues of prosecutorial supervision at almost any of the stages of the process of bringing to administrative responsibility identified in the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, especially regarding the execution of decisions in cases of administrative offenses. Further development of legislation on administrative responsibility will make adjustments to the practice of prosecutorial supervision, which will require the development of more modern methods for checking their implementation.

1. Constitution Russian Federation. 2. Code Russian Federation on administrative offenses. 3. Arbitration procedural code of the Russian Federation. 4. Civil procedural code of the Russian Federation.

5. About the prosecutor's office Russian Federation: Federal Law of January 17, 1992 No. 2202-I // VSND and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 1992. No. 8. Art. 366; (as amended on July 17, 2009 No. 171-FZ).

6. About the introduction into force of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses: Federal Law of December 30, 2001 No. 196-FZ // SZ RF. 2002. No. 1 (part I). Art. 2. (as amended on April 26, 2007 No. 63-FZ). 7. About the executive production: Federal Law dated October 2, 2007 No. 229-FZ (as amended on December 30, 2008 No. 306-FZ). 8. About judicial bailiffs: Federal Law No. 118-FZ dated July 21, 1997 (as amended on December 25, 2008 No. 280-FZ). 9. About judicial system of the Russian Federation: Federal Constitutional Law dated December 31, 1996 No. 1-FKZ (as amended on April 5, 2005 No. 3-FKZ). 10. About the main guarantees of the rights of the child in the Russian Federation: Federal Law of July 24, 1998 No. 124-FZ. eleven. About the organization prosecutorial supervision over the implementation of laws, observance of human and civil rights and freedoms: order Prosecutor General RF dated December 7, 2007 No. 195. 12. About the organization prosecutorial supervision over the execution of laws by bailiffs: instruction of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation dated May 12, 2009 No. 155/7. 13. About some issues related to the implementation of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses: Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated January 27, 2003 No. 2. 14. About some Issues that arise for courts when applying the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses: Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 24, 2005 No. 5.

Lyudmila Borisovna Datchuk,

Boris Ivanovich Shalygin

Prosecutor's supervision of legality
execution of decisions on cases
about administrative offenses

Toolkit

Editor Yu.G. Kazantsev

Proofreader L.A. Perovskaya

Computer layout L.V. Kurdyukova

Signed for publication on November 2, 2009. Format 60x90/16. Pech.l. 6. Circulation 200. Order 90. Academy of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation 123022, Moscow, st. 2nd Zvenigorodskaya, 15