The article substantiates the relationship between state management decisions and strategic management acts. The latter are the basis not only for building a system of legal acts of management in the field of ensuring national security as the most important component of state sovereignty of the Russian Federation, but also for the adoption and implementation of managerial decisions in this field. It is concluded that it is necessary to clarify the content of strategic planning documents and to give them legal certainty, systematicity and hierarchy. The types of these documents are analyzed: strategies; state policy frameworks; doctrines; concepts; state programs. The following model of hierarchy of strategic acts of management in the field of national security is argued: strategy of national security of the Russian Federation — conceptual acts (bases of state policy, doctrines, concepts) on the most important directions of ensuring national security of the Russian Federation — strategies on the most important directions of ensuring national security of the Russian Federation — state programs of the Russian Federation on the most important directions of ensuring national security. 

The article considers the formation of two management systems after the adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation — the system of public administration and the system of local government. The conceptual peculiarities of managerial decision-making in both systems are investigated, and the conclusion is made about the differences in the configurations of the channels of their information links. The advantages and disadvantages of the public administration system as a centralized system based on cybernetic principles, as well as the positive and negative aspects of the synergetic nature of the local government system are analyzed. As public administration systems need a certain decentralization of management, so local government systems cannot do without orientation on a number of issues on centralized commands. It is concluded that in Russia for a long period of time there was no proper information interaction between the system of public administration and the system of local government. It is noted that the appearance in the Constitution of the Russian Federation of part 3 of Article 122 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation determined not only the existence of a unified system of public power, but also the existence of an integral system of governance, the capacity of which to make effective management decisions is higher than the total capacity of the previously existing self-sufficient systems.

The article considers management decisions made by officials in conditions preceding emergency situations, as well as when they have already occurred and to eliminate the consequences of which require the creation of temporary forms of management and the use of special forces and means. On the basis of the analysis of examples it is concluded that the effectiveness of management decisions taken in emergency situation conditions depends on the quality of their preparation. Such management decisions should be prepared in advance and formalized as much as possible, which will avoid negative consequences. It has been proved that in extreme cases in conditions of time and resource shortage, lack of necessary legal norms, in order to save people it is possible to go out of the legal field and make management decisions that violate the law. Immediately after the liquidation of the consequences of an emergency situation, it is necessary to analyze the causes and conditions of such decisions and to adopt appropriate legal acts as soon as possible.

The article examines the features of managerial decision-making in such public authorities as enforcement agencies. The author considers management decisions in enforcement agencies from the point of view of the phonomena of their legal status, in particular, as a tool for ensuring the enforcement of an authoritative decision of a judge, judicial authority, other public authority, official in relation to a single legal entity: a citizen, an organization, a public authority. This proves the importance of the role of management decisions in ensuring human and civil rights as the highest value, authoritative publicly significant decisions on the scale of the entire state. Adhering to a broad interpretation of the definitions of the concepts of “public administration”, “act”, the author comes to the conclusion that the management decision — this is a process that requires formalization, and which permeates the entire activity of the enforcement authority, in particular and mainly, illustrating the process of enforcement proceedings, asserts that a management decision accompanies it from the moment of receipt of the enforcement document to its completion, says that as long as the state exists, it will need tools for the enforcement of authority decisions, and therefore in a management decision. According to the author, a legally significant managerial decision of the enforcement body, its official, is based on a triad of conditions on the basis of which it is made: legislative, jurisdictional, competent; it takes the form of a legal act of management, the main of which is a resolution. In addition to resolutions, the author names such forms of management decisions as a request, a bilateral act and others, arguing his position from the point of view of a broad understanding of the term “act”. The author comes to the conclusion that the adoption of a managerial decision in enforcement proceedings is a vivid example of a combination of administrative procedure and specific administrative and jurisdictional proceedings, characteristic only of a bailiff conducting enforcement proceedings, in the unity of conditionally allocated types of administrative procedural activities.

The article focuses on the grounds for decision-making by public authorities on refusal to grant ownership of land plots. The issues related to the concept of unauthorized construction under the civil legislation of the Russian Federation, the basis for the acquisition of property rights arising as a result of bona fide, open and continuous ownership and use, referred to as the acquisition prescription, are disclosed. The author reveals the specifics of the application of the “garage amnesty” when considering an application for preliminary approval of the provision of a land plot for the placement of a capital garage. Depending on this, an assessment is given of the need to apply to judicial authorities for recognition of ownership of previously issued land plots by public authorities. The article provides judicial practice related to the appeal of decisions of the executive authorities of the subject of the Russian Federation. In this connection, the author concludes that it is necessary to carry out regular monitoring of the development and decision-making of public authorities, as well as professional development of officials. This will help to avoid misinterpretation of the law when making decisions on granting land plots to citizens.

The article examines theoretical and practical issues of the influence of administrative customs on the process of making management decisions. Various points of view of Soviet and Russian scientists regarding the concept and characteristics of a management decision, as well as its relationship with an administrative act, are analyzed. The issues of establishing administrative procedures and their impact on management decision-making are explored. The opinions of famous scientists regarding the concept and characteristics of administrative custom are studied. The most interesting and illustrative examples of administrative customs in modern Russia are given. The concept is given and the distinctive features of administrative practice are defined. At the end of the article, arguments are given indicating the role and significance of administrative customs in the mechanism for making management decisions.

The article reveals the main content of the administrative and legal fight against corruption carried out by specially authorized state bodies at the federal level. The author emphasizes the high degree of public danger of corruption and corruption manifestations in public administration, as well as the high degree of attention from the scientific community to this issue over the years. The paper examines the anti-corruption powers of the President of the Russian Federation, the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, and individual federal executive authorities. The powers of the subjects of administrative and legal anti-corruption are analyzed taking into account the peculiarities of public administration and the adoption of appropriate management decisions. In this context, the example described in the paper of the denunciation of the Council of Europe Convention on Criminal Liability for Corruption, due to the extremely unfriendly and discriminatory policy of sanctions by Western countries against the Russian Federation, is particularly indicative. In addition, the work analyzes certain provisions of legislation and subordinate regulatory legal acts establishing the relevant anti-corruption powers of state bodies and officials. The article also presents and reveals the categories of the administrative and legal mechanism for combating corruption, as well as specialized managerial anti-corruption forms and methods.

One of the forms of realization of public power is managerial decisions that apply to all spheres of public administration. Licensing is the most important administrative procedure. It is aimed at preventing threats and possible damage to economic relations, environmental protection, public health, social relations, defense and security of the state, the potential for which is associated with the implementation of certain types of entrepreneurial activity. This article discusses such a type of management decision, which is aimed at optimizing the management process. Digitalization involves improving and changing the model of the administrative licensing procedure. Special attention is paid to such a digital solution as the implementation of the registry model of a management solution. This made it possible to significantly simplify the administrative licensing procedure, reduce its time, as well as to conduct most of the interaction with the licensing authority remotely. The author notes the positive impact of digital transformation on the management decision-making process in the field of licensing, and also proves that the use of technology has made it possible to increase efficiency and automate most of the management processes in the administrative procedure. In conclusion, the author notes the prospects for the modernization of Russian legislation in the field of licensing and argues for proposals for its improvement.

The publication notes the transformation in recent years of approaches to the sovereignty of the Russian state and the volume of the range of subjects authorized to prepare, adopt, implement and control management decisions to ensure state sovereignty.  The author focuses on the key role of the President of the Russian Federation in ensuring state sovereignty and examines the legal forms of his managerial decisions in this area. According to the results of the study, the conclusion is formulated that currently regulatory legal acts (with a number of exceptions) do not define in what legal forms the administrative decisions of the President of the Russian Federation should be made to ensure state sovereignty in certain specific cases. Also, the grounds and specifics of making such decisions are mostly not established. A thorough legal settlement of these issues would enhance the effectiveness of appropriate measures, reduce duplication of legal regulations and minimize administrative discretion in making managerial decisions to ensure State sovereignty.

The article is devoted to the topic of the significance and complexity of the managerial decision on the engineering, testing and application of legal innovations. In the author’s opinion, many problems of legal and legal-digital innovation are reduced to the ambiguity of their functional-target load and very high difficulty of confirming that they are really needed, to the extreme difficulty of predicting their implementation. And it is this that complicates the adoption of an appropriate managerial decision. Managerial decision on legal innovations, due to the crystallization of the substrate of managerial discretion in it, always entails a high responsibility for its adoption. The author points out that there are no unified generally recognized ways of operating activities in the field of legal innovation and management of the corresponding innovation process. But there are some general management principles and requirements that are quite transferable to this sphere. The author substantiates that with all the significant differences between the private market legal sector and the public administration sector, in making a decision on the development, testing and implementation of legal and securing legal and digital innovations, both managers — the head of a public authority and the head of a commercial firm — are placed in similar conditions. The author in his article articulates the problem of time resource, objectively required for what is presented as a “legal innovation” to really become a legal innovation and a good legal innovation. According to the author, legal innovation is not a quick process, and it is not a one-time phenomenon, but a responsible discretion in making the appropriate managerial decision — it is always objectively time-consuming. The author raises the question that any innovation, and legal innovation in particular, has its own life cycle, at the end of which it outlives itself, exhausts its potential for innovation. Although there are legal innovations that have transformed into legal axiomatics and traditional legal everyday tools. But in any case, we talk about legal innovations without disconnecting from time, from its flow, from the notches on its scale. The author declares the article as posing a scientific problem, but at the same time the author offers a conceptual answer to some of such questions.

The article analyzes scientific works that had a significant influence on the genesis and evolution of the theory of administrative discretion: “The Spirit of Law” by Charles Montesquieu (1748), “Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution” by Albert Dicey (1885) and “Public Administration and the Public Interest” by E. Pendleton Herring (1936). It is shown that initially administrative discretion was understood as reasonable (rational) activity of executive authorities and their officials, then administrative discretion began to be opposed to law as such, and recently it is increasingly interpreted as creative activity of the government in the framework of anticipatory discretionary regulation. Special attention is paid to the continuity and expansion of the above ideas, their development in the concepts of other researchers, including modern ones, as well as their criticism. The conclusion is made that these ideas should be taken into account in the formation
of the Russian theory of administrative discretion.

The article is devoted to the problems and risks of machine analytics and other digital technological resources in making managerial decisions in public administration. The author raises the difficult question of the fact that against the background of loud victory speeches about mass measures of digital transformation in public administration, some timid and sensible voices have been lost, asking: can everything be perfect and without flaws? No technological nodes and solutions today work with 100 per cent reliability. The same is true of human organisations. No one and nothing is perfect. Therefore, defects, dysfunctions, imbalances, and errors in public administration have been in the past, are now, and will be in the future. The problem is that digital technologies, while helping to combat some of these defects, dysfunctions, imbalances, and errors in public administration, drive other defects, imbalances, and errors in public administration very deeply into the ground and create third ones. And we have not yet learnt how to diagnose all this. The article gives some eloquent examples of great harm caused by failures of machine analytics to support public administration decision-making. The author shows typical problems of digitalisation in public administration, but concludes that these problems are solvable.

The basic terms and definitions inherent in Soviet administrativelegal science are examined; dogmatic concepts currently used in everyday life in domestic science and teaching need to be improved; in many cases they are not applicable in the existing political and legal realities. The concept of “public administration” does not correspond to its purpose in the conditions of separation of powers, constitutional and legal guarantees for the activities of executive authorities, pluralism of various forms of ownership, especially non-public ones. Using the example of teaching activities in the field of German administrative law, the need to distinguish between various training courses is shown, first of all, substantiating the theoretical postulates of German administrative law science — Verwaltungslehre, Polizeiund Ordnungsrecht, from training courses devoted, just like in domestic administrative law , the study of the institutions of the Special Part of Administrative Law — Besonderes Verwaltungsrecht. The dogma of “public administration” is now being replaced by the study of the theoretical postulates of the executive branch, with special attention should be paid to the generality and subordination of public and civil regulation in various spheres of government influence, primarily in relation to property regulation, which is especially significant in conditions of the dominance of public property relations , based on the hierarchical subordination of their participants, and not regulated by civil law.

Russian Truth is the oldest monument of the law of feudal Rus’. It reflects the growth of princely power and the expansion of the princely court. This study is devoted to identifying the features of law and legal proceedings in this era. Like the ancient Laws of the XII tables in Ancient Rome and the Babylonian laws of King Hamurabi (Hamurabi), to which our study was devoted. Russian Truth is also a judge. In it we meet the rules of law, which we now call administrative law and process. Separate historical epochs are mixed up in Russkaya Pravda, there is no systematization of norms. A separate part of the truth is called “The Court of Yaroslav Vladimirovich.” Russkaya Pravda does not give us a complete account of the organization of the princely court. Separate princely decisions became the norm for subsequent court decisions. So, the prince sets penalties for killing people depending on their position. Pravda Yaroslavichi forbids blood feuds and introduces a fine instead. Litigation under Russkaya Pravda is adversarial, which establishes pre-trial procedures. The relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendants is clarified. This order is called “arching” and “persecution of the trace.” Competitiveness arises from those forms of struggle that existed even in a tribal society, when relations were sorted out by force. The study showed that the law according to Russian Pravda has gone ahead of the primitive customs of more ancient times and represents a developed system, where there was a court, a process, a system of evidence and punishments.

 The article is devoted to the concept of an administrative act, which is developing in the friendly legal systems of the CIS countries, considered in three aspects: doctrine, legislation and judicial practice. It is stated that the Russian theory of administrative act, on the one hand, is a creative development of the French and German doctrine, and on the other hand, it continues to have a certain influence on the post-Soviet space. On the contrary, in terms of legislation on administrative acts, Russian reality is lagging behind, since the rest of the CIS countries have already adopted westernized laws that, along with the rules on administrative procedures, also establish the material legal basis for the institution of administrative acts. Finally, it is substantiated that in terms of judicial practice on issues of control over the legality of administrative acts, the Russian legal system, despite a certain lag in the regulatory framework, is among the progressive among other CIS countries. The conclusion about the advisability of integrating the achievements of the CIS legal systems for the purposes of their further development is substantiated.

The article analyzes the problem of the content of the legal defi- nition of “administrative law enforcement act”. Based on the conducted re- search, the author substantiates that an administrative law enforcement act is a qualified act of a competent entity based on the law, affecting the state of administrative and legal relations, aiming to cause certain legal consequences and expressed in a documented specific legally authoritative command. The author notes that the study of a significant amount of legal literature indicates the absence of a unified approach among scientists on quantitative and qualitative criteria of administrative law enforcement acts. The trend of modern administrative and legal relations and the change of priorities in legal regulation certainly affect the complex of functions of an administrative law enforcement act, which can only be conditionally called a system, which certainly preserves the inter

In modern economic conditions, due to restrictions on foreign economic activity and sanctions pressure, it is strategically important to improve the quality and efficiency of management decisions in the field of business activities. Excessive legal regulation, unreasonable requirements, bureaucratization of the processes of interaction between the state and business lead to the emergence of administrative barriers to the implementation of entrepreneurial activities. Despite the fact that the category of administrative barriers is actively used in legislation, a large number of studies have been devoted to the scientific literature, however, the legal nature and content of this concept remains unstudied. The work provides the author’s definition of an administrative barrier, distinguishes this concept from “barriers of economic policy”, “state-political barriers”, “legal barriers” represented by defects in legal regulation, “organizational and institutional barriers”. The complex nature of the institution of administrative barriers is shown, which includes economic, legal and social components.

When administrative authorities exercise discretion, they have a kind of freedom to choose one decision. Such freedom however has never been complete due to the fact that laws have limited it. Thus, courts are often faced with the problem of assessing the legality of such decisions. The article has presented the criteria for such the assessment. However, this article demonstrates decisions from different countries. Since their judicial reasoning is largely similar, such judgments can be compared with each other. Similar reasoning also allows to formulate the foundation of a “general theory of administrative discretion”. This foundation is the same for many legal systems, but each contains distinctive features of this theory. Among the evaluation criteria, compliance with legal rules, (legality), achievement of governance goals, compliance with procedural requirements, as well as material grounds are highlighted. To evaluate discretionary acts, courts must use legal techniques. Authorities sometimes published “reference solutions” that can serve as guidelines for administrative authorities who are forced to exercise their discretion.

This paper examines the issues of improving emergency legislation regulating the protection of the state from external aggression. Issues of ensuring the security of the state in modern conditions are becoming particularly relevant due to the increasing threats from third states. This circumstance necessitates the existence of an integrated system of norms governing the concept, types, and content of relevant administrative and legal regimes, as well as the grounds and procedure for their introduction, the nature and scope of restrictions established to ensure them, procedures and limits for the application of protective measures and the grounds for termination of such emergency regimes. The article analyzes the concept of “special military operation” and its relation to related terms. The author pays special attention to the systematization of the imposed restrictions depending on the response mode (level). Special attention is paid to administrative responsibility for violation of the established restrictions in accordance with the accepted level of response. Conclusions on the improvement of legislation are formulated.

The article reflects the current challenges and threats faced by the Russian Federation in the implementation of migration processes. The author analyzes the most acute threats arising in the field of migration, and examines the causes of their occurrence. The author pays special attention to the characteristics of the main measures taken by the state to combat such challenges and threats, which include migration registration, fingerprint registration of foreign citizens. The article pays considerable attention to the use of digital technologies in the field of migration. Legislative initiatives that
can become an effective means to combat threats in migration relations, prospects for the use of mechanisms for pre-entry training of foreign citizens and their organized recruitment are also being considered. According to the results of the study, it is concluded that it is necessary to conduct a balanced migration policy and maintain a balance when applying coercive and incentive measures in state regulation of migration processes.

This article considers the prerequisites for the emergence of the principle of federalism in the legal regulation of administrative responsibility in the unitary Russian state before 1918, in terms of the development and continuity of managerial decisions in proceedings on cases of administrative offenses as a mechanism for the implementation of administrative responsibility. The thesis about the isolation of administrative responsibility in the public law of the pre-revolutionary Russian state is taken as a basis. Attention is paid to the forms of individual managerial decisions, through which arise, change and terminate protective administrative-procedural relations, which were provided for in the Russian legislation and legal acts of local authorities. The conclusion is made about the presence of continuity in the development of administrative decisions in the relevant sphere in the Russian Empire, RSFSR and the Russian Federation.

The amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which came into force following the results of the all-Russian vote in July 2020, directly affected issues of public administration in education. These constitutional amendments refer to the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation to establish a unified legal framework for the system of education and upbringing, including continuing education. At the same time, the strategic directions for the development of the state outlined by the President of the Russian Federation after the publication of amendments to the Constitution
determined the need to achieve digital maturity of key sectors of the economy and the social sphere, including education. The article examines the issues of managing the digital transformation of education based on the constitutional thesis on the continuity of education, as well as taking into account the principle of unity of education and upbringing established at the legislative level, the unity of the educational space on the territory of the Russian Federation.

The author considers the issues of defining procurement in the Russian Federation and analyzes certain scientific legal positions devoted to the genesis of the institute of procurement for public needs. The author analyzes the opinions of scientists on the issue of division into stages and classification of these stages of procurement for public needs at which management decisions are made. Based on the analysis, the author attempts to formulate a definition of procurement for public needs. The author analyzes the fact of the influence of a managerial decision on the procurement process for public needs, proposes a classification of the stages of managerial decision-making in procurement, analyzes the relationship between managerial decisions and the results of procurement. According to the results of the study, the author justified the opinion that the adoption of each of the management decisions directly affects both the implementation of the subsequent stages and the result of the procurement for public needs as a whole.

The article is devoted to the discretion in making administrative decisions on the issues of establishing and clarifying mandatory requirements of regulatory legal acts. The author analyzes the normative legal regulation, in the Russian Federation», and considers specific examples of legally established powers of administrative authorities. In the course of the study the author comes to the conclusion that the root cause of discretion in making managerial decisions is the law, its imperfection or on the contrary a conscious measure of the legislator, giving discretionary powers to officials. The author proposes possible solutions to the cases of imperfections of legislative acts identified by him, in particular, by amending such legislative acts. In conclusion, the author notes that imperfection (lack of systematic regulation, gaps, etc.) of legislative acts, vesting administrative bodies with relevant powers, affects the degree of discretion in establishing and explaining mandatory requirements by administrative bodies. In some cases, such a degree of discretion is excessive, leading to unfavorable practical consequences, which, in turn, calls into question the achievement of generally recognized (public) goals of the institution of mandatory requirements.