The review contains the abstracts of the participants of the All-Russian scientific-practical conference “Modern problems of building the Russian model of the administrative process”, held on June 4, 2021 at the Siberian Law University (Omsk) and being the next stage in the development of the discussion of domestic administrative law scholars about the current model of the Russian administrative process, its concept, types,
volume and structure, directions for improving the administrative procedural legislation, based on the standards of a legal state and taking into account the experience of foreign countries. Despite the difference in approaches to understanding the administrative process, the theoretical construction of its model, the conference participants expressed a common opinion about the urgent need to develop and adopt legislative acts that ensure an appropriate level of proceduralization of administrative activities and, accordingly, reliable protection of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and organizations in the field of their relationship with the public administration.

Despite the awareness of the importance of digital transformation of highways as the basis for life safety, social and economic development of the country, the issues of technical, legal and financial regulation of the digitalization of the transport complex at the federal and regional levels, a detailed assessment of the impact of digital technologies in transport on social and economic processes in modern Russian society. In the Russian doctrine in recent years, research has been carried out in general on the formation and development of the digital economy in Russia, in which intelligent transport systems are mentioned pointwise and only in general terms without their comprehensive analysis. Based on the assessment of the current state and trends in the development of info-communication transport infrastructure in Russia, foreign experience, potential problems of the implementation of digital technologies in transport in the socioeconomic and legal dimension were identified, specific proposals were formulated on the legal and financial regulation of issues and minimization of the risks of liability for harm in conditions development of information transport systems. The role of the programs “Digital Economy of the Russian Federation” and “Safe and High-Quality Roads” in the development of intelligent transport systems has been analyzed, and as a result, promising areas for the use of unmanned vehicles to improve the quality of life of people, develop entrepreneurship, high-tech industries, and increase the investment attractiveness of Russia have been identified. and strengthening its position in the international arena. The study used the following methodological principles: objectivity; determinism; historicism; integrity; consistency; structure; functionality; hierarchy; pluralism of explanation and understanding of law; comparative studies. The study uses private methods: legal analytics, legislative techniques, legal comparative studies, expert assessments. As the main results of the study, the features of the legal regulation of new and promising relations arising in the digital economy have been identified. This is a strategic legal planning and legal experiment. Taking into account this conclusion, a system of prerequisites for the development of intelligent transport systems was formulated based on the analysis of national programs. The system of prerequisites includes three levels: technological prerequisites, infrastructural and regulatory.

The pension system of the Russian Federation has undergone three fundamental reforms. In 1992, the first law on pensions began to operate in Russia, which significantly differed from the Union legislation. In 2002, insurance principles were introduced into the pension system, which led to a change in the entire system of pension coverage for persons working under an employment contract, including new types of pension coverage. In 2015, there was a significant reform of the existing insurance pension system, which in its significance is no less significant than all the previous changes in the pension legislation. Each pension reform changed the procedure for calculating pensions, legislatively establishing a new pension formula for determining the amount of a pension. Along with this, the structural elements of pensions also changed. At the same time, it is possible to identify similar features in the structural elements of pensions assigned in different periods, but at the functional level. The totality of similar functions of pension elements allows us to talk about certain patterns in the development of the pension provision of the Russian Federation. So, despite the change in the nature of pensions from state to insurance, the essence of pensions, in general, remained the same. Moreover, the essence and functions of the elements of state and insurance pensions are largely the same. The pension is a social security payment with a complex structure. The presence of a structure, the presence of elements and connections between them, indicates a complex function performed by a pension. This function cannot be reduced to a compensatory function, a function of assistance or a function of substitution of earnings. There is an element in the pension structure that reflects past employment. In pensions of different nature, this happens in different ways: wages are taken into account (in state pensions) or insurance contributions (in compulsory pension insurance pensions). In addition, the pension should include an element that increases the amount of the pension in the presence of special circumstances of a subjective nature: disabled dependents, the need for constant outside care. In pensions for state pension provision, such an element is supplements to pensions; in compulsory pension insurance, this function is performed by a fixed payment. Social pensions and funded pension are one-component payments, which raises questions not only about the nature of these pensions, but also about their essence.

For many decades, the issues of systematization of international criminal law, if not in the center of attention of the subjects of international lawmaking, are at least not removed from the agenda. At the same time, the negotiation process on this topic, even at the present time, is far from over; a significant number of problems of both a legal-technical and a political nature remain unresolved. An analysis of the historical experience of the codification of international criminal law, an attempt to bring it into a single report is the main task of this article, while its purpose is to determine the most significant stages of the codification of international criminal law, to establish the prerequisites for decisions of a law-making nature adopted at the international level, their logic and significance for the current state of the system of international criminal policy. The methodology of this research is made up of such methods as formal legal, logical and systemic interpretation of law, historical and comparative analysis. Both the main and the final parts of this study represent a short excursion into the formation of international criminal policy, indicate the main guidelines in the study of various areas of international criminal law.

The subject of the study is the norms of the legislation of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses, which establish the powers of the subjects of the Russian Federation to determine the procedure for moving detained vehicles to a specialized parking lot and storing them. The object of the study is public relations related to the organization of the activities of service providers for the movement and (or) storage of detained vehicles, as well as the selection of these service providers. Within the framework of the article, the Author presents an analysis of federal and regional legislation in terms of the implementation of powers by public legal entities in this area of relations. The problems of the implementation of federal legislation, as well as the main approaches, similarities and differences of the "advanced" legal regulation of the relations under consideration at the level of the subjects of the Russian Federation are noted. The existing legislative models for involving local self-government bodies in the exercise of the authority to organize specialized parking lots for the storage of detained vehicles are analyzed. In the research paper, the Author presents options for determining the performers of services for the movement and (or) storage of detained vehicles, analyzes the legal grounds for the implementation of each of them, taking into account the existing law enforcement, including judicial practice. For the purpose of unified legal regulation of relations on the movement and (or) storage of detained vehicles, aimed at implementing measures to ensure the proceedings in the case of an administrative offense in the form of detention of a vehicle, the Author formulated proposals for the legislative consolidation of the federal authorities of the authority to determine the procedure for selecting performers of services for the movement and (or) storage of detained vehicles. To ensure equal opportunities for economic entities to carry out activities in the market of services for the movement and (or) storage of detained vehicles, the Author proposed, within the framework of the above procedure, to determine the requirements for the performers of these services, as well as the criteria for their competitive selection. At the same time, the paper substantiates the need for mandatory application of the territorial criterion for the selection of performers of these services for the movement and (or) storage of detained vehicles, taking into account not only the boundaries of the relevant municipality, but also the distance of specialized parking lots from socially significant objects.

With the inclusion of the category “simulation” in the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences an interest arose in studying “simulation” in the system of principles of the administrative process. The purpose of the study is to formulate general recommendations for neutralizing the negative consequences of manifestations of feign in the system of principles of the administrative process. The methodological basis of the research is materialistic dialectics and elements of conceptual analysis. The methods of analogy and generalization allow us to justify the use of the construction of “simulated legal phenomenon” for the study of the principles of the administrative process. The survey revealed obstacles to the implementation of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence. The comparative legal analysis allows us to establish the comparability of the volumes of state repression in the measures of administrative and criminal responsibility, a clearly negative assessment of simulation in administrative law compared to its neutral assessment in civil law, to identify a number of obstacles to the functioning of the principles of the administrative process. Other standard research methods are also used. The expediency of analyzing the simulation of the system of principles of the administrative process is justified; a simplified model of the system of principles of the administrative process is used for the analysis; from the standpoint of assessing legal simulation, the analysis of the principle of legality, the principle of procedural equality, the principle of guilt, the principle of presumption of innocence, as well as the principle of respect for the honor and dignity of the individual was carried out. In order to reduce the level of obvious simulation in the system of principles of the administrative process, in particular, it is recommended: in the doctrine of the administrative process to consider the principle of legality not as a reality, but as a goal; in the laws, replace the term “legality” with the term “lawfulness”; in the laws, the wording “the principle of equality before the law” and the like should be replaced with “the principle of equality of rights”; part 1 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences should be amended as follows: “a person is subject to administrative responsibility only for those socially harmful actions (acts of inaction) in respect of which his guilt is established”; part 3 of Article 1.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences after the words: “...is not obliged to prove his innocence” should be supplemented with the words “but has the right to disagree with all or part of the arguments confirming his guilt, or to refute them”. It is also recommended to amend the legislation in order to unify the approach to the differentiation of administrative offenses and crimes.

The entry into force of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the qualitative changes that were made to the text of the latter led to legislative activity. Laws were adopted, reflecting the changes made to the text of the Constitution, and containing new and / or little-studied terms, concepts, phenomena. Special attention of scientists and researchers was attracted by the Federal Law “On the State Council of the Russian Federation”, which came into force in December 2020, which for the first time legalized such terms as “public power”, “unified system of public power”, etc. The position is also of interest, expressed in the conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated March 16, 2020 No. 1-З in connection with the request of the President of the Russian Federation. It became necessary to give explanations and Author’s comments on the positive law of the country caused by these novelties. The term “public authority” is not a novelty for Russian legal science, but it has not been widely studied, and in connection with legislative changes it acquires new qualities, characteristics that need explanation and justification. The legislator provides an extensive definition of these terms. This makes it necessary to comprehend their essence, highlight the main elements of the public power system and demonstrate their political and legal ties, as well as the forms of interaction that take place in the public law regulation of relations between the subjects (elements) of a unified system of public power. Purpose: to investigate the essence of the concepts of “public power”, “unified system of public power”, to identify the characteristic features of the concept of “unified system of public power”. Among the main tasks: to show the political and legal ties and forms of interaction that arise between the subjects (elements) of a single system of public authority. Methods: logical, analytical, comparative legal, dialectical methods, allowing to reveal the essence, internal connections and the ratio of concepts enshrined in the federal law “On the State Council of the Russian Federation”, to reveal the features of a unified system of public authority. Results: state authorities are listed that correspond to the characteristics specified by the legislator, political and legal ties and forms of interaction that arise between the subjects (elements) of a unified system of public authority are identified, conclusions corresponding to the study are drawn.

This article provides an overview of the main provisions of German administrative procedural law. It outlines in a systematic way the particularities of administrative procedures and the possibilities for a citizen to seek administrative remedy. The essence of the basic principles of administrative procedural law as well as the particularities of temporary legal protection and the possibilities for an extrajudicial appeal against an administrative act are explained to the reader. The Author points out that administrative proceedings in Germany are, in a broad sense, any decision-making activity of a public administration body. According to the German Administrative Procedure Act, an administrative procedure in the sense of the law is an externally imposed activity of the administrative authorities that is aimed at verifying the conditions, preparing and issuing an administrative act or entering into a public-law contract. At the same time, the activities of a public administration body are not bound by a specific form, unless there are specific rules on the form of procedure. It is stated that current German administrative law distinguishes between an administrative act and a general order. The latter is also an administrative act, the range of addressees, however, is wider. An administrative act according to the law is any order, decision or other authoritative action of an administrative body aimed at regulating a single case in the field of public law and having direct legal consequences of an external nature. A general order is an administrative act, which is addressed to a certain or defined by general features, or which concerns the public-law properties of a thing or the use of it by the public. The author notes that an administrative act must be specific in content, justified and announced to the participants in the proceedings. As long as the act has not been declared, it is invalid. An administrative act is valid from the moment it is announced, unless it itself provides otherwise. It continues in force until it is revoked, cancelled, terminated by a deadline or for any other reason specified in the law. Based on the analysis, it is concluded that the lack of a law on administrative procedures in Russia is a negative indicator of the modern Russian administrative legal system.

The current problems of administrative-legal regulation in the field of health protection and ensuring the sanitary-epidemiological well-being of the population of the Russian Federation are investigated, eurrent trends in its development and problems of systematization are considered. Based on the analysis of statistieal data and the practice of applying international legal acts regulating the issues of interaction in the field of preventing the spread of dangerous infectious diseases, the conclusions and recommendations of the World Health Organization and other international organizations, proposals are formulated for further improvement of national legislation in the field of ensuring the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the population, methods are proposed its systematization and options for possible codification. The features of the mechanism of administrative and legal regulation of relations that develop during the implementation of state sanitary and epidemiological supervision in the conditions of the spread of dangerous diseases are analyzed. A new model for the development of sectoral legislation in the field of sanitary and epidemiological welfare is proposed, based on modern criteria and principles of systematization of regulatory legal acts that ensure sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population and protection of public health. The main versions of draft model laws in the form of codified legal acts aimed at improving the activities of executive authorities and their officials performing the functions of state regulation and sanitary and epidemiological supervision in the studied sphere of relations are submitted for discussion.

The issues of criteria for the nullity of administrative acts are considered, the ratio of an illegal and invalid act, as well as a null and void act, analyzed, the possibility of administrative discretion in determining an invalid administrative act is analyzed, the role of vague legal concepts when an administrative act is declared invalid is demonstrated. The Author uses a comparative legal method, including the analysis of the practice of Germany, Great Britain, South Africa, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Russia and other countries. Special attention is paid to the laws on administrative procedures adopted in the post-Soviet territory and the influence of the German doctrine on this process. It is concluded that for the continental legal order the most preferable way to formalize the criteria for the invalidity of an administrative act are laws on administrative procedures or their analogs, while in the common law states, legal doctrine and judicial practice are of great importance. At the same time, many countries avoid recognizing acts as null and void, preferring the construction of their voidability. This is related to ensuring the stability of public administration, the predictability of administrative activities, and the protection of legitimate expectations. In any case, the theory of the reality of the administrative act is prevailing, and nullity is rather viewed as an anomaly. Therefore, only acts that are adopted with the most significant violations, which do not allow talking about the fair consequences of their adoption, are considered invalid. The illegality of an act does not automatically entail its nullity. A similar trend can be traced in Russia, although individual norms of law and practice of courts indicate the possible formation of a doctrine of the invalidity of an administrative act in the Russian legal system. Insignificant acts do not give rise to consequences from the moment of their adoption, legally they do not exist, and nothing can generate anything. With this approach, the courts only fix the criterion of invalidity without a dispute about law. Insignificant acts should be distinguished from contested ones, the latter may turn out to be illegal, but for a number of reasons (for example, protection of trust) the fact of their existence is confirmed along with their consequences.