Babayan, K.A. Principles of proof in administrative jurisdiction activities of the customs bodies.

Abstract: The object of studies includes combination of legal norms, theoretical provisions and aspects of practical activity defining the principles of activities of customs bodies officials regarding evidence and proof in the administrative offences proceedings. The immediate object of the studies includes both the norms of administrative procedural law and the norms of material law regulating the relations, which appear in the relating regarding the movement of goods and vehicles through the customs border of the Customs Union. The theoretical basis for the study was formed with the provisions of the theory of proof, administrative process and other procedural branches of law, as well as of the customs law. The article also involves analysis of some aspects of law-enforcement activities of structural divisions and officials of the customs bodies, taking part in the process of proof on administrative offences cases. In the process of studies the author used dialectic method of scientific cognition, reflecting the interrelation between theory and practice, general theoretical methods: deduction, analysis, synthesis, analogy. The author also involved method of comparative legal studies. The issues regarding the principles of procedural proof in administrative offence cases within the competence of the customs bodies did not previously form an object for independent studies. The conclusions are as follows: the author provides classification of the administrative procedural proof with due respect to the specific features of administrative jurisdiction activities of the customs bodies — the adversarial nature of proof in administrative jurisdiction activities of the customs bodies in relation with the judicial proof (viewing the cases on concealment of goods from customs control under Art. 16.1 p.2 of the Administrative Offences Code of the Russian Federation), judicial challenging of decisions of the customs bodies on administrative offences cases; there is need to clarify the list of persons, for whom there are special conditions for the application of injunctions on administrative offences cases and administrative responsibility. It is also offered to amend the legislation in order to include the principle of fairness in part of making decisions on administrative offence cases. There is also need to widen the scope of competence of tax bodies for initiation and resolution of cases regarding violation of the procedure for the international automobile transportation through the state border of the Russian Federation. There is need to clarify the procedural status of the representative of an organization or an individual entrepreneur in the process of examination of premises and territories, as well as objects and documents there in the process of implementation of various types of state control (supervision) by the customs bodies, since the requirements to the evidence are analogous to those for typical evidence on administrative offences cases.

Keywords: