Issues of the Involvement of Officers in Administrative Responsibility for Committing an Administrative Offense Provided By Part 4.1 of Article 7.30 of the Russian Federation Code on Administrative Offenses

 The regulatory standards of the legislation on the contractual system in the field of procurement and legislation on the protection of competition are provided with the protective norms enshrined in the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses. Sometimes in the disposition of one protective norm, the requirements established by different branches of law can be combined. One such example is Part 4.1 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses.
In the legislation on the protection of competition, for cases of procurement of goods, works, services in order to meet state and municipal needs, there is a prohibition on the inclusion of goods, works, services that are  technologically and functionally unrelated to each other in one lot, if such an action leads to limit competition. The specifics of bringing persons to administrative responsibility under Part 4.1 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses for violation of this  prohibition in the scientific literature did not receive proper coverage. A  feature of the proceedings in cases of administrative offenses under Part 4.1 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses is the absence of definitions of the concepts of “functional communication” and “technological communication”. Uncertainty of concepts creates a situation where the border between illegal and lawful actions is very  conditional, which causes cases of unjustified bringing persons to  administrative responsibility.
Part 4.1 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative  Offenses also provides for administrative responsibility for the inclusion in  the description of the object of the procurement of requirements and  instructions regarding trademarks, service marks, trade names, patents, utility models, industrial designs, appellation of origin of goods or manufacturer's name, requirements for goods, information, works , services, provided that such requirements entail a limitation of the number of participants in the procurement, with the exception of cases provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on the contractual system in the field of procurement. This prohibition is established in the legislation on the contractual system in the field of procurement.
An analysis of law enforcement practice indicates that in a number of cases, officials were brought to administrative responsibility without proving the conditions established in Part 4.1 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses that such requirements of the customer entail a limitation of the number of participants in the procurement.
According to the results of the study, the shortcomings of the text of the protective norm in Part 4.1 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, proposals were made to amend the Code of the  Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses. The Author points out the  need for a normative definition of the definitions of the concepts “functional connection” and “technological connection”. 

1. Borisova L. V., Savolainen A. A. Vidy narushenii i otvetstvennost’ zakazchika v sfere osushchestvleniya zakupok dlya obespecheniya gosudarstvennykh ili munitsipal’nykh nuzhd [Types of Violations and Responsibility of the Customerin the Field of Procurement of Purchases for Ensuring Government or Municipal Needs]. Samoupravlenie, 2019, vol. 2, no. 2 (115), pp. 38–40.

2. Borisova L. N. Primenenie stat’i 2.9 KoAP RF pri rassmotrenii del ob administrativnykh pravonarusheniyakh o zloupotrebleniyakh dominiruyushchim polozheniem [The Application of Article 2.9 of the Administrative Code When Examining Cases on Administrative Offences of Abuse of Dominant Position]. Vestnik Saratovskoi gosudarstvennoi yuridicheskoi akademii – Saratov State Law Academy Bulletin, 2014, no. 4 (99), pp. 71–75.

3. Vedyashkin S. V. Okhranitel’naya funktsiya administrativnogo prava: kontsept i realizatsiya [Protective Function ofAdministrative Law: Concept and Realization]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo – Tomsk State University Journal of Law, 2017, no. 26, pp. 33–44. DOI: 10.17223/22253513/26/3.

4. Voroshilov V. S., Tishchenko V. A. K voprosu ob administrativnoi otvetstvennosti za droblenie zakupok [On the Issue of Administrative Liability for Split Purchases]. Baikal Research Journal, 2020, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 20. DOI: 10.17150/2411-6262.2019.11(2).20.

5. Evsikova E. V., Sevastianov E. M. K voprosu o privlechenii k administrativnoi otvetstvennosti za narushenie antimonopol’nogo zakonodatel’stva [To the Question of Administrative Prosecution for Violation of the Antitrust Law]. Uchenye zapiski Krymskogo federal’nogo universiteta imeni V. I. Vernadskogo. Yuridicheskie nauki – Scientific Notes of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Juridical Science, 2019, vol. 5 (71), no. 2, pp. 270–281.

6. Kvanina V. V. Ob”edinenie v odin lot tovarov, rabot, uslug: problemy pravoprimeneniya [One Lot Consolidation of Merchandises, Works, Services: Law Application Issues]. Yurist – Jurist, 2016, no. 7, pp. 20–27.

7. Kozhokar I. P. O pravovykh defektakh i pravovoi defektologii [On Legal Defects and Legal Defectology]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Yuridicheskie nauki – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences, 2018, iss. 4 (42), pp. 558–586. DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2018-42-558-586.

8. Kurakin A. V., Badulin A. D. Problemy realizatsii mer administrativnoi otvetstvennosti v sfere proizvodstva i oborota etilovogo spirta, alkogol’noi i spirtosoderzhashchei produktsii [The Problem of Implementation of Administrative Measures in the Sphere of Production and Sales of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic and Alcohol-Containing Products]. Administrativnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo – Administrative and Municipal Law, 2012, no. 6, pp. 59–66.

9. Kurlevsky I. V., Ogrina G. V. Administrativnaya otvetstvennost’ za narushenie zakonodatel’stva o kontraktnoi sisteme v sfere gosudarstvennykh zakupok [Administrative Responsibility for Violation of Legislation on Contract System in Public Procurement]. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya –Theory and Practice of Social Development, 2017, no. 4, pp. 89–91. DOI: 10.24158/tipor.2017.4.20.

10. Plekhanov D. A. Konstruktsiya “Tekhnologicheskaya i funktsional’naya svyaz’ tovarov (rabot, uslug)” v antimonopol’nom zakonodatel’stve [The Structure “Technological and Functional Relation of Goods (Operations, Services)” in Antimonopoly Legislation]. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta kooperatsii – Vestnik of the Russian University of Cooperation, 2016, no. 4 (26), pp. 135–140.

11. Rukavishnikov S. M. K voprosu o droblenii gosudarstvennoi i munitsipal’noi zakupki [On the Issue of Split of State and Municipal Procurement]. Sibirskoe yuridicheskoe obozrenie – Siberian Law Review, 2019, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 240–244. DOI: 10.19073/2658-7602-2019-16-2-240-244.

12. Spirchagov G. S. Otvetstvennost’ v sfere zakonodatel’stva o kontraktnoi sisteme [Responsibility in the Field of Legislation on Contracting]. Simbirskii nauchnyi vestnik – Simbirsk Scientific Journal Vestnik, 2018, no. 1 (31), pp. 58–64.

13. Telegin A. S., Tiunova N. V. Povtornost’ soversheniya administrativnogo pravonarusheniya [Repetition of Administrative Offenses]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Yuridicheskie nauki – Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences, 2019, iss. (4) 46, pp. 626–650. DOI: 10.17072/1995-4190-2019-46-626-650.

14. Yuritsin A. E., Lavrov Yu. B. O nekotorykh problemakh realizatsii administrativnoi otvetstvennosti za narusheniya zakonodatel’stva o kontraktnoi sisteme v sfere zakupok [Some Problems of the Implementation of Administrative Responsibility for Violations of the Legislation on Contract System in the Procurement Sphere.]. Vestnik Omskoi yuridicheskoi akademii – Vestnik of the Omsk Law Academy, 2017, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 105–108. DOI: 10.19073/2306-1340-2017-14-4-105-108.

15. Chiti E., Mattarella B. G. (Eds.). Global Administrative Law and EU Administrative Law. Relationships, Legal Issues and Comparison. Heidelberg, Springer, 2011. 409 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-20264-3.

16. Sokolov A. Y., Krotov K. S., Batova V. N., Dzhamirze B. Y. The Problems of Administrative Liability for the Unfair Usage of Digital Platforms. Digital Future Economic Growth,Social Adaptation, and Technological Perspectives. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 2020, vol. 111, pp. 115–121. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-39797-5_12.