Administrative Discretion: Questions and Answers (Part 1)

This material opens a series of scientific publications planned by the editors of the Siberian Law Review journal, the Authors of which analyze the problem of administrative discretion (discretion), which is very relevant for Russian administrative legal theory and law practice, in the “question-answer” format. The scientific, theoretical and practical significance of the noted problem is predetermined by the fact that the exercise of discretionary powers by the public administration (as opposed to powers strictly bound by law) is fraught with the greatest threat to the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens, the rights and legitimate interests of organizations. The purpose of the study is to clarify issues related to the concept and essence of administrative discretion, its regulatory legal framework, forms of implementation, ways to establish the limits of discretion of public administration, criteria for assessing the legality of discretionary administrative acts, judicial and agency control over administrative discretion. The subject of the research is normative legal acts, legal principles, administrative and judicial acts, scientific works of Russian and foreign legal scholars. The hypothesis of the study is that, despite the abundance of scientific publications on administrative-discretionary topics, the domestic doctrine of administrative discretion is a motley mixture of judgments that do not agree with each other, often divorced from the needs of administrative and judicial practice, characterized by the absence of a single categorical apparatus. According to Yuri P. Solovey, an important, if not the most important section of administrative discretionary issues, are the limits of judicial control over administrative discretion, which has practically fallen out of the field of view of Russian scholars, despite the fact that it has been thoroughly studied abroad for more than a century and a half. From the point of view of Petr P. Serkov, the domestic science of administrative law has not yet properly answered three fundamental questions, namely: what is administrative discretion, what is it intended for and how is it carried out. The Authors of the publication are unanimous that such a “doctrine” of administrative discretion does not contribute to the development of legislative solutions to bring such discretion to the standards of a legal, democratic state. In the process of research, dialectical, formal-logical, formal-legal, comparative-legal methods of cognition, the method of interpreting law, analysis of materials from administrative and judicial practice are used. The Authors attempt to streamline the categorical apparatus of the theory of administrative discretion, as well as to formulate its main provisions and some proposals for improving the current legislation.

1. Pudelka J. (Herausgeber), Blankenagel A., Hartwig M., Mallmann O., Weber J. Verwaltungsprozess. Konzeption, Modellgesetz und Kommentierung. Berlin: Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag GmbH; 2014. 206 S. (In German, in Russ.).

2. Hartwig M. Basic Principles of Administrative Law. In: Public Law Yearbook – 2014. Administrative Law: Comparative Legal Approaches. Moscow: Infotropik Media Publ.; 2014. P. 39–62. (In Russ.).

3. Davydov K. V. Discretion and Some Errors of the Legislator. Journal of the Administrative Proceedings. 2017;2:57-65. (In Russ.).

4. Starilov Yu. N. Administrative Law – to the Level of the Legal State. Voronezh: Voronezh State University Publ.; 2003. 79 p. (In Russ.).

5. Serkov P. P. Legal Relationship (Theory and Practice of Modern Legal Regulation). Part 2: Outlines of Legal Universality. Part 3: Regularity of Legal Regularity. Moscow: Norma Publ.; 2018. 1087 p. (In Russ.).

6. Serkov P. P. Administrative Law, Administrative Proceedings and Mechanism of Legal Relations. Journal of the Administrative Proceedings. 2016;1:14-24. (In Russ.).

7. Ol P. A. Legal Understanding: from Pluralism to Dual Unity. St. Petersburg: Yuridicheskii tsentr Press Publ.; 2005. 241 p. (In Russ.).

8. Sobolev O. V. Administrative and Judicial Discretion: Nature and Scope of Application. Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure. 2016;12:3-7. (In Russ.).

9. Shchepalov S. V. About the Discretion of the Court in Cases Provided By Chapter 22 Of CAP RF. Russian Justice. 2015;10:34-39. (In Russ.).

10. Gizatullin I. A. Freedom of Judicial Discretion in the Application of Explanatory Acts of the Superior Courts of the Russian Federation. Russian Justice. 2022;7:42-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52433/01316761_2022_07_42 (In Russ.).

11. Serkov P. P. Legal Relationship (Theory and Practice of Modern Legal Policy). Part 2. Moscow: Norma Publ.; 2023. 870 p. (In Russ.).

12. Serkov P. P. Legal Relationship (Theory and Practice of Modern Legal Regulation). Part 1: Limits of the Legal Unknown. Moscow: Norma Publ.; 2018. 512 p. (In Russ.).