Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Administrative and municipal law
Reference:

Comparative legal analysis of the institution of administrative punishment in the current Code of Administrative Offences and in the Draft of the new Code of Administrative Offences

Chernyshenko Il'ya Gennad'evich

ORCID: 0000-0003-4066-8446

Student, Civil and Business Law, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation

125993, Russia, Moscow, Moscow, Leningradsky Prospekt str., 49

cheig@inbox.ru
Other publications by this author
 

 
Kiselev Aleksandr Sergeevich

ORCID: 0000-0002-5044-4721

PhD in Law

PhD in Law, Senior Lecturer, Department of International and Public Law, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation

125993, Russia, Moscow, Leningradsky Prospekt str., 49

pain068@yandex.ru

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0595.2022.3.37709

EDN:

TBIXXB

Received:

18-03-2022


Published:

22-08-2022


Abstract: In connection with the completion of the development of the new Code of Administrative Offenses, it becomes obvious a change in the approach, including to the application of administrative punishment. The objects of research in this article are: the system of administrative penalties (their types and sizes) and the procedure for the application of administrative punishment in accordance with the draft new Code of Administrative Offenses. The author pays special attention to the change in the approach to the application of administrative penalties in terms of the transformation of the characteristics of administrative measures of responsibility and the legal technique of the presentation of administrative and legal norms governing the institution of administrative punishment. Also, the special subjects of the research of the topic were the categorization of administrative offenses into coarse and coarse and the formulation of a definition to the concept of a homogeneous administrative offense.   The main conclusions of the study are: highlighting the relevance of the adoption of the draft new Administrative Code in terms of regulating the institution of administrative punishment, substantiating the legal fate of the adoption of such a project, otherwise determining the consequences of its non-acceptance, for example, destabilizing the legal regulation of the institution of administrative punishment and maintaining the priority of the punitive function of administrative punishment over the preventive. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that the author has formed a full-fledged commentary on the presentation of the institute of administrative punishment in the draft of the new Administrative Code: the essence of the changes, the target orientation of their introduction. This article summarizes the current problems associated with the imposition of administrative punishment, indicates the different opinions of legal scholars on this issue and provides the author's vision for making each change to the system of administrative penalties.


Keywords:

Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, administrative offense, punishment, measure of responsibility, administrative legislation, project, prevention, temporary prohibition of activity, administrative suspension of activity, administrative fine

This article is automatically translated.

To date, public discussions have already taken place regarding the text of the draft new Code of Administrative Offences (hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Code), a conclusion has been prepared on the assessment of regulatory impact, the relevant Concept has been submitted by the Government of Russia, the development of the draft has been completed, however, the new Administrative Code has not yet been finalized to the final version and has not been submitted to the State Duma of the Russian Federation for consideration. According to the author of this article, there is a serious need for a radical revision of administrative legislation contrary to the repeatedly changing approaches to the presentation of administrative and legal norms in the draft Administrative Code and the Procedural Code of Administrative Offenses from 2020 and the necessary long-term improvements of the text of the drafts by the Ministry of Justice of Russia.

It should be noted what factors determine the need to revise the current administrative legislation:

1) numerous changes that have been made to the current administrative legislation (about 5 thousand changes made), their presence in the system of administrative legislation violates the stability of legal regulation due to their unsystematic presentation, lack of unity; 2) the desire to free the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the competent executive authorities from unnecessary explanatory work in relation to constantly changing administrative-legal norms; 3) transformation of the existing structures of administrative offenses, the desire to devote most of the new Administrative Code to the structures of administrative offenses, highlighting new structures; 4) changing the approach to the appointment of administrative penalties; 5) the allocation of proceedings on administrative offenses in a separate procedural code in order to minimize the cumbersomeness of administrative legislation, as well as, according to the author of the article, for the purpose of the long–awaited differentiation in the system of procedural legislation of two codified acts - the CAS and, possibly, the soon-to-be Procedural Code of Administrative Offenses.

It is these key circumstances that should determine the immediate transition to the regulation of administrative and legal relations by the norms of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation [1].

In this article, the author will consider a change in the approach to the presentation by the legislator of the system of administrative penalties, as well as the procedure for the appointment of administrative punishment.

1. The current administrative legislation provides that when committing several administrative offenses, punishment is imposed for each offense committed. The text of the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation provides for the exclusion of the possibility of imposing administrative penalties for several homogeneous administrative offenses committed by a person.

An indication of the definition of a homogeneous administrative offense is not contained in administrative legislation, but takes place in judicial practice. Thus, in accordance with paragraph 16 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 03/24/2005 No. 5 "On some issues arising from courts when Applying the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation", a homogeneous administrative offense is actually several administrative offenses, which include a single generic object of encroachment [2]. According to the author, it is necessary to directly indicate the signs of a homogeneous administrative offense in the new administrative legislation. Understanding under a homogeneous administrative offense not only the composition of the offense specified in one article of the Special Part, but also in several, will eliminate the problem of unjustifiably bringing a person to administrative responsibility, will contribute to the real, rather than formal implementation of the principles of justice and proportionality of administrative penalties.

2.      A warning, as a measure of administrative punishment, will be imposed for the first time committed an administrative offense, even if it is not directly provided for by the sanction of the article of the Special Part as an administrative punishment if the administrative offense committed by the person does not entail aggravating circumstances and if the administrative offense does not have the character of a gross administrative offense.

Despite this optimal decision of the legislator, aimed at prioritizing the preventive function over the punitive one, there is a problem of the legislative classification of administrative offenses into rough and rough, moreover, such a classification can be clearly traced in the doctrine, but, unfortunately, such a classification, apparently, will not be in the legislative structure, and the differentiation of a rough administrative offense from a rough one will become one of the powers of the law enforcement officer (body or official of administrative jurisdiction).

Thus, V. I. Surgutskov proposes to recognize as gross such a socially dangerous administrative offense, when considering which it is necessary to apply certain measures to ensure the proceedings in cases of administrative offenses [9, p. 548]. Kozhevnikov O. A., Nikonova Yu. Sh. define the categories of rudeness of an administrative offense, among which: the type of administrative offense (the authors indicate mainly socially dangerous administrative offenses in the list), aggravating circumstances, a threat to the security of the individual, society and the state, the repetition of administrative offenses committed [6, pp. 100-101]. According to the author of this article, the legislative consolidation of over the listed categories to distinguish between gross and non-gross administrative offenses will avoid the evaluative value of the mentioned classification by the law enforcement officer, incorrect application of substantive law and abuse of evaluative categories by the law enforcement officer.

3.      In the current Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, there is an upper and lower limit of administrative punishment in the form of a fine, a discount is provided for the advance payment of a fine only for a non-rough administrative offense in the field of security of an administrative offense. So, another draft, the draft Code of Administrative Responsibility, instead of the upper and lower limit of the size of the fine (i.e. specific amounts), based on the legislative experience of the Eurasian Economic Union, calculated indicators (basic values) are introduced, below which a fine cannot be imposed (for example, for officials and entrepreneurs, this value will be at least 0.5; for individuals – 0.1, for legal entities – at least 2 calculated indicators) [1, p. 199]. In the draft of the new Code of Administrative Offences, the legislator proposes to leave the higher and lower limits of the fine amounts only at the level of the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. It will be possible to take advantage of a discount on the advance payment of a fine to a person who has committed any administrative offense (with the exception of gross administrative offenses). Thus, such changes are aimed at reducing the administrative burden in the form of paying an administrative fine, as well as encouraging offenders to pay an administrative fine on time.

4.      The current administrative legislation provides for the confiscation of only the instrument or object of an administrative offense, and the instrument or object that has not been withdrawn from civil circulation. In the text of the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, it is allowed to confiscate not only the instrument or object of committing an administrative offense, but also other property that is not such. Confiscation of other property will be carried out only if there are the following criteria: "the property is owned by the person who committed an administrative offense (in permanent or temporary possession); the owner has not taken measures to eliminate the causes and conditions of the commission of an administrative offense, i.e. allowed its commission through the use of this property (for example, may be subject to seizure from the offender's motor vehicles, small vessels, etc.).

In addition, in the text of the draft, the legislator retains the general rule of confiscation: "confiscation is the forced gratuitous transfer to state ownership of things that are not restricted in circulation." Please note that in legal practice, of course, things that are not in legal circulation are subject to seizure (limited in civil circulation, for example, counterfeit products). The legislative structure, which is now preserved and is present in the Draft Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, artificially restricts the category of things subject to confiscation as an instrument or object of an administrative offense. It is necessary to change the content of the definition of confiscation: "confiscation is the forced gratuitous conversion into state ownership of an instrument or object of an administrative offense, or other things that served as a reason or condition for committing an administrative offense, both limited in civil circulation and not limited in it."

5.      In today's Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the deadline for mandatory work is two hundred hours, the list of categories of persons to whom mandatory work, as a measure of administrative punishment, cannot be applied is limited. In the text of the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the deadline for mandatory work is sixty hours, the legislator additionally attributed to the circle of persons in respect of whom this penalty is not applied: disabled children, single parents (or persons replacing them) who raise a child under 14 years of age, persons caring for a disabled person I and II groups, including for a disabled child, and among civil servants, the list has been supplemented with categories: employees of the prosecutor's office, employees of diplomatic missions, consular institutions of the Russian Federation, permanent missions of the Russian Federation to international (interstate, intergovernmental) organizations, other official representations of the Russian Federation and representative offices of federal executive authorities located abroad Moreover, the legislator provided for the non-application of compulsory work to women who have children not under the age of three, but under the age of 14.

We point out that the expanded list of persons will also be characteristic of the application of administrative punishment in the form of arrest with the addition of the category of minors and persons with a disease specified in the list of diseases that prevent the imposition of this type of punishment. Such changes, in the author's opinion, are important taking into account the social status of many categories of persons, as well as the legal status of persons of a special category who ensure the security, protection and protection of the interests of the state.

6.      Analyzing the text of the draft of the new Administrative Code, the following types of administrative penalties are undergoing serious changes: administrative expulsion from the Russian Federation of a foreign citizen or a stateless person, administrative suspension of activity (will be excluded from the system of administrative penalties), deprivation of a special right. Such changes related to the transformation of administrative penalties were due to the need to improve administrative and legal norms: to eliminate contradictions in legislative regulation, to rid the legislator of the ineffectiveness of the application of various administrative penalties. The change in the characteristics and procedure for the application of these administrative punishments is aimed at strengthening the preventive effect on the offender (increasing a certain efficiency coefficient in the application of punishment).

Thus, in comparison with the current administrative legislation, the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation provides for the possibility of not appointing and replacing administrative punishment in the form of administrative expulsion from the Russian Federation of a foreign citizen or a stateless person with another type of administrative punishment.

In comparison with the current administrative legislation, the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation will exclude administrative suspension of activities from the system of administrative penalties, as previously indicated, and in return, an administrative (temporary) ban on activities will be applied from the list of measures to ensure proceedings on an administrative offense, however, in order to avoid confusion of institutions, a temporary ban on activities will be excluded from the list of procedural security measures. An administrative ban on the commission of certain actions, as a measure of administrative punishment, will have certain types, for example, an administrative ban on the operation of vehicles, the application of this measure of administrative punishment will be the exclusive authority of the court, in contrast to the procedure for the application of a security measure in the form of a temporary ban on activities by a control or supervisory authority.

Unfortunately, in accordance with the current administrative legislation and in accordance with the text of the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the deprivation of a special right is applicable only to an individual. According to the author of the article, it is necessary to extend the application of this administrative punishment to legal entities. By analogy with the special legal capacity of an individual, it should be argued that a legal entity has the same characteristic special (limited) legal capacity on the basis of a permit document, for example, to implement only those activities for which a corresponding license has been obtained, i.e. the presence of a special right is characteristic not only for an individual, but also for a legal entity. Thus, in the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, it should be established that "in connection with a gross violation of the conditions and procedure for the use of a special right granted by a permit document, the deprivation of a special right as a measure of administrative responsibility is applicable both to an individual and to a legal entity."

Regarding the change in the procedure for the application of administrative punishment, it is worth noting the change in the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility. In accordance with Article 4.5 of the current Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the total limitation period for bringing to criminal responsibility is 2 months, and on the basis of Article 3.31 of the draft new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the total limitation period for bringing to administrative responsibility is one year. An increase in the total limitation period for bringing to administrative responsibility will ensure the completeness, objectivity and correctness of the consideration and resolution of the case of an administrative offense. The list of circumstances mitigating administrative responsibility is also supplemented, for example, by a circumstance in the form of an administrative offense committed by a person raising a child under the age of fourteen alone. In turn, the appearance of other mitigating circumstances is a consequence of the humanization of administrative legislation, through which the legislator takes into account the social status of a person and a wide range of life circumstances that were the causes and conditions for the commission of administrative offenses.

The categorization of administrative and legal norms regarding the institution of administrative punishment has also undergone changes. Thus, cases of exemption from administrative responsibility and from administrative punishment, replacement of administrative punishment, postponement, installment and suspension of execution of administrative punishment are combined in a separate chapter and regulated in detail, issues of types and procedure for the application of administrative penalties against minors are set out in a specially designated chapter of the code. It is disproportionately important to introduce special measures of administrative responsibility to minors by analogy with measures of educational influence to minors in criminal law, for example, restriction of leisure or the establishment of special requirements for a minor). Changes in the rubrication (presentation) of administrative and legal norms regarding administrative punishment will allow to stabilize the legal regulation of this institution, as well as to specify (regulate) an additional list of administrative legal relations related to the application of administrative punishment. It should be noted that it remains common in the current and new administrative legislation to leave 10 types of administrative punishments, to outline the content of the institute of administrative punishments by type, purpose and order of their application, by varieties for basic and additional.

Nikanorova M. V. rightly points out the main purpose of the draft of the new Administrative Code: "Legislators will no longer face the task of punishing and fining. Priority will be given to the prevention of violations, including forced" [8, p. 181]. In general, with the introduction of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, guarantees of respect for rights and legitimate interests will increase, legal regulation of relations in the sphere of administrative punishment and administrative responsibility will be stabilized, the possibilities of providing a preventive function will be expanded, administrative legislation will be fully humanized. However, delays associated with the entry into force of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation lead to changes in the approaches outlined in the original text, to changes in social (socio-political) realities, introduce ambiguity and uncertainty in the possible adoption and entry into legal force of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation.

Thus, as part of the final conclusion, we note that the adoption of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation in terms of changing the approach to the application of administrative penalties is a forced necessity due to both the optimization of the legal regulation of the system of administrative penalties and the priority goals of such changes that were indicated above. The abandonment of the current Administrative Code of the Russian Federation will continue to destabilize the legal regulation of administrative legal relations, exclude the full application of effective measures for the prevention of administrative offenses, contain in most cases a punitive purpose of administrative punishment and a high penalty burden for certain categories of offenders.

References
1. Draft "Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation". (prepared by the Ministry of Justice of Russia, ID project 02/04/05-20/00102447) (not submitted to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, text as of 29.05.2020) http://www.consultant.ru: Reference-legal system "ConsultantPlus". 1997, URL: http://www.consultant.ru/law/hotdocs/62684.html (date of reference: 07.03.2021).
2. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 24.03.2005 ¹ 5 (red. from 23.12.2021) "On some issues arising in courts when applying the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offences" http://www.consultant.ru: Reference-legal system "ConsultantPlus". 1997, URL: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_52681 (date of reference: 13.03.2021).
3. Amelchakova V. N., Suslova G. N. (2020). Novation of the draft Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Responsibility. Bulletin of Economic Security, 1, 198-200.
4. Evsikova E. V., Ponomarev A. V. (2020). Administrative responsibility of minors in the reform of the administrative and tort legislation of the Russian Federation. Juridical Herald of DSU, 2, 85-92.
5. Kamolov S. G., Kirillova E. A., Pavlyuk A. V. (2017). Institution of administrative responsibility. Moscow: Aktualnost.RF.
6. Kozhevnikov O. A., Nikonova Y. Sh. (2021). Discussion aspects of the draft of the new Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences. Bulletin of the Siberian Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 1 (42), 97-104.
7. Ledaschev S. V., Dyadkin O. N., Ruzevich O. R. (2020). New Code on Administrative Offences: for and against. Modern Law, 7, 35-39.
8. Nikanorova, M. V. (2019). Some conceptual provisions of the new Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation. Young Scientist, 46 (284), 181-182.
9. Surgutskov V. I. (2019). To the question of categorization of administrative offences. Siberian Legal Review, 4, 545-549.
10. Tsyndrya V. N. (2021). Actualization of the problems of implementation of administrative-punitive policy of the Russian Federation in modern conditions. Scientific Notes of the Crimean Federal University named after V.I. Vernadsky, 3-2, 50-57.

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

A REVIEW of an article on the topic "Comparative legal analysis of the institution of administrative punishment in the current Code of Administrative Offenses and in the Draft of the new Code of Administrative Offenses". The subject of the study. The article proposed for review is devoted to the comparative legal analysis of the "...institute of administrative punishment ..." of the current Administrative Code of the Russian Federation and in the Draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The author has chosen a special subject of research: the proposed issues are investigated from the point of view of comparative law, while noting: "According to the author of this article, there is a serious need for a radical revision of administrative legislation contrary to the repeatedly changing approaches to the presentation of administrative law norms in the draft Administrative Code and the Procedural Code of Administrative Offenses from 2020 and the necessary long-term improvements to the text of the drafts by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation." The proposed changes are mainly studied, while the author notes "... what factors determine the need to revise the current administrative legislation" and lists them, including "numerous changes ...; the desire to free the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the competent executive authorities from unnecessary explanatory work regarding constantly changing administrative and legal norms", etc. A certain amount of scientific literature is also being studied and summarized (although almost the whole of 2020 or the beginning of 2021, but the articles were prepared in 2020) on the stated issues. The author is absolutely right why there is no scientific literature of Russian scientists after these dates. Probably, as the author correctly believes, it simply does not exist. At the same time, it is noted that "In this article, the author will consider a change in the approach to the presentation by the legislator of the system of administrative penalties, as well as the procedure for imposing administrative punishment." Research methodology. The purpose of the study is determined by the title and content of the work "... with the introduction of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, guarantees of respect for rights and legitimate interests will increase, legal regulation of relations in the field of administrative punishment and administrative responsibility will stabilize, the possibilities of providing a preventive function will be expanded, administrative legislation will be fully humanized." It can be designated as the consideration and resolution of certain problematic aspects related to the above-mentioned issues and the use of certain experience. Based on the set goals and objectives, the author has chosen a certain methodological basis for the study. In particular, the author uses a set of general scientific, special legal methods of cognition. In particular, the methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to summarize and separate the conclusions of various approaches to the proposed topic, as well as draw some conclusions from the materials of the opponents. The most important role was played by special legal methods. In particular, the author used a formal legal method, which allowed for the analysis and interpretation of the norms of current legislation. In particular, the following conclusions are drawn: "In today's Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the deadline for mandatory work is two hundred hours, the list of categories of persons to whom mandatory work, as a measure of administrative punishment, cannot be applied is limited," "The current administrative legislation provides that when committing several administrative offenses, punishment is imposed for each committed an offense..." and others. At the same time, in the context of the purpose of the study, the formal legal method is applied in conjunction with the comparative legal method. It is important to note here that the author declares some aspects of the problem with citing research and provides supporting references to opponents. Thus, the methodology chosen by the author is fully adequate to the purpose of the article, allows you to study certain aspects of the topic. The relevance of the stated issues is beyond doubt. This topic is important in Russia, from a legal point of view, the work proposed by the author can be considered relevant, namely, he notes that "The text of the draft new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation provides for the exclusion of the possibility of imposing administrative penalties for several homogeneous administrative offenses committed by a person." The author also provides recommendations and suggestions. Thus, scientific research in the proposed field is only to be welcomed. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of the proposed article is beyond doubt. It is expressed in the specific scientific conclusions of the author. Among them, for example, are the following: "... legislative consolidation of over the listed categories to distinguish between gross and non-gross administrative offenses will avoid the evaluative value of the mentioned classification by the law enforcement officer, incorrect application of substantive law and abuse of evaluative categories by the law enforcement officer ...". And as you can see, these and other "theoretical" conclusions can be used in further scientific research. Thus, the materials of the article as presented may be of some interest to the scientific community in terms of contribution to the development of science. Style, structure, content. The subject of the article corresponds to the specialization of the journal "Administrative and Municipal Law", as it is devoted to the comparative legal analysis of the "... institute of administrative punishment ..." of the current Administrative Code of the Russian Federation and in the Draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The article explicitly states that this question has already been raised. The content of the article corresponds to the title, since the author considered the stated problems and achieved the goal of his research. The quality of the presentation of the study and its results should be recognized as improved. The subject, objectives, methodology, and results of legal research directly follow from the text of the article. The design of the work generally meets the requirements for this kind of work. No significant violations of these requirements were found, except for some inaccuracies and unclear provisions. For example, where did the author get the following from: "In addition, the legislator provided the following clarification in the text of the draft: "confiscation of an instrument, an object of commission of an administrative weapon or other property is possible even if they cannot be in legal circulation"" (it is absent in the Draft); "Deprivation of a special right unlike the norms of the current administrative legislation, it will apply not only to individuals, but also to legal entities" (the Draft refers only to an individual "Article 3.16. Deprivation of a special right granted to an individual"); "Regarding the change in the procedure for applying administrative punishment, it is worth noting an increase in the total limitation period for bringing to administrative responsibility from two months (three months, if the case of an administrative offense is considered by the court) up to one year" (does not correspond to reality, it practically remains the same as in the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, only presented in a different form in the Draft). Bibliography. The quality of the literature used should be highly appreciated. The author actively uses the literature presented by domestic authors. The works of the above authors correspond to the research topic, have a sign of sufficiency, and contribute to the disclosure of certain aspects of the topic. Appeal to opponents. The author conducted a serious analysis of the current state of the problem under study. The author describes different points of view on the problem, tries to argue a more correct position in his opinion, and offers solutions to individual problems. Conclusions, the interest of the readership. The conclusions are logical, specific, but not always justified (see the comments), they are obtained using a generally recognized methodology. The article in this form may be of interest to the readership in terms of the systematic positions of the author in relation to the issues stated in the article. Based on the above, summing up all the positive and negative sides of the article, I recommend that you still "send the article for revision" (eliminate comments).

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the study is public relations in the field of legal regulation of the institution of administrative punishment. The author supports changes in administrative legislation and provides arguments obtained as a result of the work done, on the basis of which it can be concluded that the research methodology has both scientific and practical components. The author applied the comparative legal method, methods of deduction, induction, analysis and synthesis. The relevance of the article is due to the changing trends in the development of society and institutions of administrative and legal regulation. The novelty of the work consists in the author's conclusions and formulated arguments proposed as a result of a comparative legal analysis of the institution of administrative punishment in the current Code of Administrative Offenses and in the Draft of the new Code of Administrative Offenses. The style of writing the article corresponds to the scientific one. According to the structure, there is a short introductory part, the main part, which includes an analytical component, author's theses and conclusions. The author substantiates the need to revise the current administrative legislation. The author cites facts confirming that an indication of the definition of a homogeneous administrative offense is not contained in administrative legislation, but takes place in judicial practice. According to the author, it is necessary to directly indicate the signs of a homogeneous administrative offense in the new administrative legislation. Understanding under a homogeneous administrative offense not only the composition of the offense specified in one article of the Special Part, but also in several, will eliminate the problem of unjustifiably bringing a person to administrative responsibility, will contribute to the real, rather than formal implementation of the principles of justice and proportionality of administrative penalties. The author believes that despite the decision of the legislator aimed at prioritizing the preventive function over the punitive one, there is a problem of legislative classification of administrative offenses into gross and non-gross, moreover, such a classification is clearly visible in the doctrine, but, unfortunately, such a classification, apparently, will not be in the legislative structure, and the differentiation of a gross administrative offense from non-rough will become one of the powers of the law enforcement officer (body or official of administrative jurisdiction). The author also provides other reasons for the need to amend the Code of Administrative Offences. Attention is drawn to the position of the prosecutor that, in accordance with the current administrative legislation and in accordance with the text of the draft new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the deprivation of a special right is applicable only to an individual. According to the author, it is necessary to extend the application of this administrative punishment to legal entities. By analogy with the special legal capacity of an individual, it should be argued that a legal entity has the same characteristic special (limited) legal capacity on the basis of a permit document, for example, to implement only those types of activities for which a corresponding license has been obtained, i.e. the presence of a special right is characteristic not only for an individual, but also for a legal entity. The author makes a proposal that the draft of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation should establish that "in connection with a gross violation of the conditions and procedure for the use of a special right granted by a permit document, deprivation of a special right as a measure of administrative responsibility is applicable both to an individual and to a legal entity." The author concludes that the adoption of the new Administrative Code of the Russian Federation in terms of changing the approach to the application of administrative penalties is a necessary necessity due to the optimization of the legal regulation of the system of administrative penalties, and the priority goals of such changes, which were indicated above. The abandonment of the current Administrative Code of the Russian Federation will continue to destabilize the legal regulation of administrative relations, exclude the full application of effective measures to prevent administrative offenses, contain in most cases a punitive purpose of applying administrative punishment and a high penalty burden for certain categories of offenders. Such conclusions may attract the interest of the readership. The bibliography includes 10 sources, including the 2021 editions, which supports the conclusion about the relevance of the presented article. I recommend it for publication.