The article reveals the legal and organizational aspects of control in the system of Federal Executive authorities. Based on the analysis of the provisions of the theory of administrative law, the concepts of «non-departmental control», «departmental control», «internal control» are defined. The features of legal regulation and implementation of non-departmental control over the activities of Federal Executive bodies by the Government of the Russian Federation, as well as by authorized Federal ministries and Federal services are revealed. The conclusion that departmental control is exercised by Federal ministries in respect of the Federal Executive bodies subordinated to them, as well as other Federal bodies of Executive power in respect of the bodies and organizations subordinated to them is substantiated. The organization of internal control in Executive authorities in the Russian Federation and foreign countries is shown. In foreign States, internal (administrative) control is carried out within the framework of the administrative system both by higher authorities and heads of Executive bodies and their structural subdivisions.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the key topic of administrative law - administrative legal relations, which are considered by the author as a system-forming element of not only administrative law, but also admin istrative and legal regulation. Subjected to scientific and critical analysis of the existing scientific ideas about administrative legal relations, the author notes their isolation from existing practice. Based on numerous examples mainly from judicial practice - court decisions, analyzing them from the point of view of the mechanism of administrative legal relations, it was concluded that administrative legal relations are a universal legal construction of administrative and legal regulation. The author agrees that public authorities and their officials, being subjects of administrative legal relations, have authority. But it is not entirely clear on what evidence the assertion is based that these subjects should dominate in relations with individuals and legal entities.

The article deals with the unification of administrative and criminal legislation on the example of tax offenses provided for by the RF Tax Code, the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code of the RF. It is concluded that tax offenses are a type of administrative offenses. These types of legal liability are close in their goals - to the protection of public interests to a great extent, administrative and tax violations are socially dangerous, content and measures of state coercion are close, the government reacts to them in almost the same way. Using the comparison of various types of legal liability in the tax field as an example, the proposals for the unification of criminal, administrative and tax liability are formulated. The main argument for this is that the nature of these types of responsibility is one. A variant of amending the legislation on criminal and administrative liability in the case of the introduction of the criminal offense category into the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation is considered. In this case, the need arises and it is possible to combine criminal, administrative and tax offenses into a single regulatory legal act. The article concludes that tax violations are essentially administrative offenses.

The article is devoted to the identification and justification of the logic of organizational, structural and functional changes in the system and structure of the federal executive authorities of modern Russia in the context of political, economic and social events and the conditions in which they were carried out. Based on the analysis of the regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation, literary sources, Internet resources, as well as the statements of the head of state, the illogical nature of individual reforms carried out during the administrative reform that began in 2003 is shown. The prerequisites, conditions, as well as the formal and factual reasons for the decision by the President of the Russian Federation on changes in the system and structure of federal executive bodies, on their individual tasks, functions and powers of managers are revealed. Hypotheses are formulated about the prospects for modernizing the system and structure of federal executive bodies in conjunction with the prevailing foreign policy situation, the state of the country's economy and the task of austerity in budgetary funds, including limiting spending on unnecessary transformations.

The article examines the system of Executive authorities of Russia at the Federal level in the modern period, describes the elements of such a system, shows their relationship. Federal Executive bodies are considered in terms of organizational, functional and substantive criteria, based on the doctrine of domestic administrative law and process. The author characterizes the system of Executive authorities of the Federal level as a whole, as well as individual elements of this system, taking into account the structure of Federal Executive authorities built on the basis of the new legislation, including Federal ministries, Federal services and Federal agencies, shows the role of the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation, exercising General management of the activities of the bodies in question, depending on the sphere of public administration -administrative and political, economic and socio-cultural. Focuses on the importance of a combination of these criteria with the characteristics of the system of Federal bodies of Executive power with regard to its integrity.

This article is devoted to the development of human rights advocacy and law-enforcement functions of the federal government authority. The author raises a question on its content and relations. The author gives an esti mate of the role of the federal government authority in order to provide human rights advocacy in the Russian Federation. It is paid attention to the necessity of the development of mechanism of human rights advocacy in general and to specific forms of the government control, providing protection of human rights and freedoms of citizens and organizations within improvement of certain acts of the Russian legislation. A comparative analysis of human rights and law enforcement functions, as the main activities of the federal bodies of executive power, has been carried out. The signs of human rights activity are investigated, its characteristic features, levels of legal mediation are revealed. An analysis of the regulatory framework that ensures the implementation of human rights activities has ensured the release of its species. It was proposed to consider administrative procedures of a human rights orientation, which include: a) the direct human rights function of federal executive bodies; b) the human rights function of the federal bodies of executive power, implemented in cooperation with public structures.

The article deals with the development of the system of Federal Executive authorities in the Russian Federation. Attention is drawn to the fact that the effectiveness of public administration depends on the system of its subjects. In modern conditions, when the forms and methods of public administration are changing, it is the stability of the system of Executive authorities that allows to solve complex problems in different industries and spheres. It is suggested that the system of Executive authorities should be effective and efficient in any situation or there should be opportunities for its rapid restructuring in accordance with the prevailing emergency or crisis conditions. A number of shortcomings of the administrative and legal status of some state bodies (bodies of the Prosecutor General’s office of the Russian Federation, the Central Bank of Russia) are singled out. The author also comes to the conclusion that the Russian Federation has formed a relatively stable system of Federal Executive authorities.

The article attempts to define the conceptual differences in the western (the so-called universal) and traditional approach to human rights and freedom and the participation of the state in their defense. The analysis of the following differences in approaches was carried out: 1) the development of legal definitions of the concept «person», the rights of which are subject to protection; concepts of «natural rights» inherent in any person; differentiation from unnatural rights that distort the biological nature of man; 2) a clarification of the essence of individual rights, the key right to life in relation to other values, the concept of «human dignity»; 3) the identifying opportunities for protection, including the degree of state participation in the observance and enforcement of human and civil rights and freedoms. A human right to be a representative of his civilization, to protect moral values, is considered in the context of strengthening the all-Russian identity, spiritual and cultural security of the state and society.It is concluded that this approach is consistent with the traditional moral values of Russian society.

The article reveals the content of the principle of presumption of innocence in administrative responsibility and highlights the features of the application of this principle on the example of administrative offenses in the securities market. A comparative analysis of the principle of presumption of innocence in administrative and criminal law is given. The author characterizes guilt as the content of the subjective side of an administrative offense against individuals and legal entities. The analysis of different approaches to the concept of guilt against legal entities is given. The article provides examples from judicial practice, confirming the presence of guilt as a necessary element of the legal composition of an administrative offense in this area. In substantiation of his words, the author pays special attention to the position of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, and also takes into account the decisions of the Arbitration court of the Krasnoyarsk territory, the Arbitration court of the Republic of Mordovia, Tushinsky district court of Moscow, the decision of the Arbitration court of the Moscow district, and others. The question of the burden of proof in the proceedings on administrative offences is raised.

The current stage in the development of legislation predetermines the need for an analysis of legislation on administrative responsibility. The authors identified the features of the institution of administrative responsibility, analyzed the legislation on administrative responsibility. A large number of compositions of administrative offenses contained in the Code on Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and the legislation of the subjects of the Russian Federation are noted. The authors, considering administrative offenses, single out certain imperfections of the Administrative Code on the formulation of administrative offenses. It is also emphasized that not all public relations are provided with administrative sanctions. Emphasis is placed on the legislation of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which establish in their legislation administrative liability for the violation of federal rules and regulations. Particular attention is paid to administrative penalties applied for the commission of administrative offenses. The problem of the need to delimit the powers of state bodies to bring persons to administrative responsibility is posed. Having analyzed the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the authors identified some problems of law enforcement and made suggestions for improving the institute of administrative responsibility.

The article examines the concept, main features and classification of administrative and legal ways to restore the violated regime of law enforcement of the executive authorities, other public administration authorities and their officials. The Author considers administrative-legal measures (means) of a preventive-restorative nature and administrative-legal measures (means) of a penal-preventive nature to such methods. Among the preventive and recovery measures (means), the issuance by the supervisory authority of a binding order to eliminate identified violations of law, cancellation or invalidation of an administrative act that does not comply with the provisions of legislation are allocated. As administrative-legal measures (means) of a punitive-preventive nature, measures of administrative and disciplinary responsibility of officials and other employees of administrative-public bodies who committed relevant offenses in the process of administrative law enforcement are considered.

The article provides a general description of the main activities of the federal executive authorities in the field of genetic engineering in accordance with the Federal Law of 05.07.1996 №. 86-FZ «On State Regulation in the Field of Genetic Engineering Activities». Special attention is paid to the tasks facing the federal executive authorities in the implementation of state policy in the field of genetic engineering. The problems of the legal regulation of genetic engineering activities in the Russian Federation and having the disadvantages of existing regulations are considered. In addition, an attempt was made to analyze the difficulties encountered in the implementation of management functions, the content of such activities of federal executive authorities in the field of genetic engineering is noted. A comparison is made to the current management system in the field of gene engineering and similar systems in the United States of America and Germany. Conclusions about the absence of proper regulation of the considered sphere are made.

In article questions of military service in the period of the republic and the empire, the period of formation of armed forces and their disintegration are considered. Questions of discipline, encouragement and punishment of the military personnel are considered. Questions of resignation, material remuneration, a length of service and other issues were resolved in the Roman right. Troops had the right to appropriate a part of the taken production, however the priority belonged to commanders here. The emperor’s title could be appropriated to the commanders who especially caused a stir in campaigns. The troops which caused a stir in fights had the right for solemn pass to Rome, triumph. For solemn passing of troops the triumphal arch well familiar to us on our cities were erected. They found reflection in our recent history. Still some of them decorate our cities in honor of glory of the Russian weapon. Behind respect for draft discipline strict control was exercised and to deviators expected severe punishment from an appeal. Originally deviators could be sent to slavery, but in a consequence this measure of punishment was replaced with softer. Began to impose a fine and confiscation of property on guilty persons. Desertion from the battlefield was considered as dangerous crime and was punished by the death penalty. The army was gradually reconstructed not only with territorial changes, but also with change of the power.

The article analyzes the functioning of specially authorized public authorities and officials for the prevention of corruption in the Russian Federation, as well as in some foreign countries. The author presents the provi sions of various regulatory legal acts establishing the legal status and powers of the relevant anti-corruption bodies of state power. The article clarified the peculiarities of the activities of anti-corruption bodies and officials of a number of foreign countries, whose governments have achieved certain success in minimizing corruption risks, as well as corruption and illegal acts. At present, the question of the possibility of creating in the Russian Federation a separate state authority body with exclusive competence to combat corruption and prevent corruption in state and administrative activities continues to be debatable. The presented work has an interdisciplinary character and is written on the basis of current regulatory legal acts of various branches of law (primarily constitutional and administrative).

The present article aims at illustrating the main characteristics of administrative procedures in Italian law. Initially, in Italy there was no general law on administrative procedures. Administrative procedures were formally regulated for the first time by the Law No. 241 of 7 August 1990, whose text has been repeatedly amendend in the course of time. The last part of the article offers an overview of the current Italian legislation on administrative procedures.

The article reveals the concept and essence of the state service. Describes the process of the emergence of the concept of «public service» in the Russian Federation. Analyzed regulatory legal acts that govern the provision of public services. An important aspect of public service is explored - should it be paid or free. Obviously, both options are possible, but the only question is that only the desire of the applicant determines whether he will use this service. The author gives his definition of public services and argues that one of the main features of public services is the voluntariness of its receipt. Finally, the author concludes that if some actions are imposed by the state on legal entities or individuals, they cannot be called state ser vices. These are only duties that must be performed. At the end of the article, the definition of the concept «public service» is defined as the function of an executive body established by a legal act of management, performed by it free of charge or for compensation, at the request of an individual or organization voluntarily declaring its desire

Strategic planning is one of the key mechanisms for ensuring targeted and sustainable development of the state, economy and society. With the adoption of June 28, 2014 No. 172-FZ «On Strategic Planning in the Russian Federation», a new stage in the formation of the state strategic planning system began in the Russian Federation. The article discusses the shortcomings of the current legal regulation of the composition of strategic planning participants at the federal level, and also makes suggestions for improving the mechanisms of strategic planning and involving a wider range of subjects in the implementation of strategic planning. The author justifies the need to expand the circle of participants in strategic planning at the expense of state corporations, which are authorized management bodies in certain industries, various scientific organizations, as well as, in certain cases, economic entities. In addition, it proposes the creation of legal mechanisms that ensure the combination of strategic planning and public-private partnership.

The article deals with an identification of subjects of rule-making in Russian Federation among which outlook executive authorities and other public authorities that realize lawmaking by issue administrative regulatory legal acts. The analysis revealed significant failings in the regulation of the procedure for the development, adoption, amendment and cancellation of administrative regulatory legal acts, which are currently only partially established by the federal legislation and do not regulate the law-making activities of many of its subjects that are not included in the system of executive authorities. The absence of uniform, clear rules for the provision of sub-legal law-making leads to the issuance of unreasonable and unproven acts. In order to improve the quality of regulatory law-making, it is necessary to eliminate the existing legal uncertainty by developing uniform rules governing the activities of all subjects of rule-making.

The article deals with the interaction of the police and public associations involved in the protection of public order, as one of the forms of implementation of the law enforcement function of the state in the field of public security. A number of contradictions in the content of legal norms regulating the participation of citizens in the protection of public order and the activity of public associations that impede effective legal regulation are revealed. The article analyzes the legislative regulation and the actual mechanisms of interaction between the state and society in this area, in particular, the forms of control by the police over the activities of public associations of law enforcement orientation, the mechanisms of state involvement of such associations to ensure public order, the issues of special training of members of public associations. The efficiency of interaction between the police and public associations is evaluated. A number of problems are revealed both in the maintenance of normative acts regulating interaction and in the implementation of interaction in practice. The ways of overcoming of the allocated problems are offered.

The article deals with the powers of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the field of cooperation. The problems of combating crimes and administrative offenses. Conclusions about the problems of legislation in the field of migration are made, and concrete examples of solutions in the field of activity in some subjects of the Russian Federation are considered. The author makes several conclusions about the practice of regional authorities exercising authority in the field of migration, which reflect their impact on wrongfulness in the migration sphere. Thus, over the years, the quota for issuing temporary residence permits in the Russian Federation to foreign citizens and stateless persons has been reduced. Moreover, the need for quotas is not reduced, which increases the tension. It is concluded that it is necessary to form a quota distribution mechanism. A commission should be created with the participation of representatives of territorial bodies of federal executive bodies, including in the field of migration and security, as well as the employment services of these regions. The responsibility of the regional authorities for the quality of quota determination work should be increased. This is due to two factors: regional authorities should more clearly understand both the social burden on the infrastructure and the real needs of individual employ.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the existing system of state regulation in the field of nuclear medicine of the United States of America. Some problematic issues related to the implementation of state regulation in the field of nuclear medicine of the United States of America are considered; attention is paid to the state body carrying out control and Supervisory activities; the features of regulation in different States are studied, the conclusion is made about the lack of uniformity of legislative regulation. Particular attention is paid to the problems of unified guidelines in the field of licensing of radio technologies, there is also a steady trend in the fragmentation of the regulatory requirements imposed by each state to the candidate radiologist and the process of fluoroscopy. A special place is given to the role of the FDA Food and drug administration, which regulates the standards of equipment emitting radioactive radiation, as well as other devices used by endovascular specialists. The importance of regulation and bringing to uniform standards the requirements of the education system, training and advanced training for doctors-operators of fluoroscopic equipment is noted. It is noted that there is a need for more thorough training of employees and the provision of state regulatory bodies with special powers to control the use of fluoroscopic equipment, which can lead to the emergence of a single national standard for the protection of patients from radiation exposure during medical procedures.