Problems and Prospects of Interaction between Subjects of Public and State Control in the Russian Federation

Goncharov Vitalii Viktorovich PhD in Law Associate Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Higher Education, Polytechnic Institute (branch), Don State Technical University in Taganrog 347900, Russia, Rostov region, Taganrog, Petrovskaya str., 109a niipgergo2009@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction.

This article is devoted to the analysis of problems and prospects of interaction of subjects of public and state control in the Russian Federation. The issues of the organization and implementation of public control in the Russian Federation are studied in the works of V. V. Grib, ^{[6, pp. 154-160]} O. V. Burdonova, ^{[2, pp. 10-14]} L. I. Kovaleva, ^{[3, pp. 72-75]} E. V. Matveeva, ^[10] Selivanova E. S., ^[12] Starchikova V. V., ^[15] M. A. Kilesso, ^{[8, pp. 24-30]} as well as a number of other authors. The analysis of the essence and directions of the development of state control in Russia is devoted to the works of M. A. Lapina, ^{[9, pp. 152-157]} S. V. Stepashin ^{[14, pp. 15-17]} and a number of other scientists. Of great interest are the works devoted to the comparison of the essence, content and directions of the implementation of state and public control in the Russian Federation, V. N. Anikienko, ^{[1, pp. 32-37]} A. D. Dokhnich, ^{[7, pp. 772-775]} A. A. Spiridonova. ^{[13, pp. 33-45]}

However, the share of works affecting the problems and prospects of interaction between subjects of public and state control in Russia is relatively small. ^{[5, pp. 59-61]}

At the same time, this issue is particularly relevant due to the fact that: first, the subjects of public control have, in our opinion, insufficient of power, which is generally, Advisory, information, Advisory, auxiliary, etc. in nature, which requires the timely delivery of the final documents and materials prepared by the subjects of public control on the results of the conducted measures of social control and contain violations of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, the rights and lawful interests of public associations and other non-profit organizations, state regulatory bodies (for example, bodies of Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation) for the implementation of the latest relevant response measures by the government; second, the efficiency and effectiveness of the measures carried out public control largely depends on how the final documents and materials prepared by the subjects of public control on the results of the activities of public control was taken into account by public authorities, state and municipal organizations, and other bodies and organizations under the Federal laws of certain public authority, in relation to the activities, acts and decisions which were carried out these measures of social control, in his work (in this case, it is the state regulatory bodies have sufficient authority to verify the extent of accounting in the work of social control proposals, recommendations and conclusions contained in the above documents and materials); thirdly, without the participation of bodies of state control is not possible criminal and administrative responsibility of officials of public control, which committed an offense identified in the course of activities of public control; fourth, the activity of the subjects of state and public control has a total focus on the prevention, suppression, prevention of violations of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, the rights and lawful interests of public associations and other non-profit organizations.  This circumstance determined the choice of the topic of this scientific research.

The main text.

The events of recent years have shown that the risk of the emergence and development of global military-political conflicts with the involvement of a significant number of states in them has increased enormously, the preservation and development of which directly depends on the degree, on the one hand, of the development of democratic principles in public administration, and on the other hand, the implementation, protection and protection of the system of constitutional principles (primarily in total - legality, responsibility, transparency of the formation and functioning of public authorities, ethics and professionalism of their officials).

In this regard, the role of the system of guarantees for the implementation of the above-mentioned constitutional principles is increasing, since the real, and not fictitious, implementation of these principles entails an increase in the legitimacy of the apparatus of public power in the eyes of the people, which serves to strengthen the mechanism of public power.

As guarantees of the implementation, protection and protection of constitutional principles in the Russian Federation are: a system of constitutional prohibitions on the misappropriation of powers, their retention, usurpation of power; institutional guarantees in the person of individual public authorities, whose main powers are to ensure constitutional principles (for example, the President of the Russian Federation is the guarantor of the country's Constitution, rights and freedoms the mechanism of checks and balances, through which the impossibility of usurpation of power, misappropriation of powers, their retention in the hands of individual public authorities, as well as their officials is ensured.

The most important basic guarantees of the implementation, protection and protection of constitutional principles in Russia are the institutions of state and public control, to understand the essence of which requires an analysis of their concepts.

Common to both types of control is the function implemented through their implementation. As M. A. Lapina rightly notes: "The control function not only ensures legality, compliance with mandatory requirements, but also provides for verification of the achievement of the model laid down in the legal norm, as well as analysis of the actual state of compliance with the rules of conduct established by the norm, the results obtained. After that, the control body analyzes the conformity of the actual state, the ratio of the results of a certain legal norm to the goals." ^{[9, p. 153]}

However, state control differs from public control in its subject composition, objects, content, methods of implementation, forms.

Subjects of state control are always only public authorities. In the Russian Federation, they are of two levels: federal state authorities and state authorities of the subjects of the Russian Federation. The subject composition of public control is presented in accordance with Article 9 of Federal Law No. 212-FZ of July 21, 2014 "On the Basics of Public Control in the Russian Federation": 1) mandatory subjects, which include: the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation (for example, the Public Chamber of Russia); 2) subjects of public control created in the cases and in the manner provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation (in particular, public control groups).

The object composition of state and public control in the Russian Federation also differs. If the objects of the latter include state and local government bodies, their officials, municipal and state institutions, as well as bodies and organizations endowed with separate public powers, then the list of objects of state control is much broader – it can include any individuals and legal entities, as well as public authorities, their officials.

The content of state control is much broader than the content of public control. It can cover all aspects of the organization and activities of legal entities and public authorities, as well as the life of individuals. Public control, in fact, is reduced to monitoring the activities of the above-mentioned objects of public control, as well as the analysis and public assessment of the acts issued by them and the decisions taken.

The list of forms of public control is quite limited. According to Article 18 of Federal Law No. 212-FZ of July 21, 2014, they include: public monitoring; public inspection; public expertise; other forms that do not contradict this Federal Law; forms of interaction of civil society institutions with state bodies and local self-government bodies (public discussions, public (public) hearings and other forms of interaction). In turn, the state control bodies are practically not limited in the forms of control.

Methods of state control in the Russian Federation are also much broader than the list of methods of public control, which is due to the exceptionally weak powers of subjects of public control, which are generally aimed at preventing and preventing violations of current legislation, as well as human and civil rights and freedoms in the activities and acts of objects of public control, but practically have no real powers to independently suppress specified offenses. However, subjects of public control have the right to use a wide range of methods to analyze information and documents that they have received both as a result of public control measures and at the request of objects of public control.

In the course of their activities, subjects of public and state control interact with each other, since, firstly, they can act as objects of control for each other, secondly, the need for their interaction is directly provided for in the current legislation, thirdly, the weakness of the powers of subjects of public control requires for effective and full implementation measures of public control over the participation of public authorities in this process, as well as their officials (for example, on the basis of article 10 of the above-mentioned Federal Law).

In the Russian scientific and educational literature, there are several approaches to determining the nature of the interaction of subjects of public and state control in Russia, the mutual rights and obligations of its participants.

According to the first approach, subjects of public and state control are equal participants in this interaction. ^{[13, pp. 33-45]} However, an analysis of federal legislation on public control shows that the legislator has significantly limited the powers of subjects of public control, although he has secured a number of mutual rights and obligations of subjects of public control and public authorities, which include subjects of state control (for example, for providing information).

Proponents of the second approach believe that subjects of state control are priority participants in interaction with subjects of public control. ^{[11, pp. 152-157]} They base their position on the fact that, firstly, the Constitution of the Russian Federation has not fixed the institution of public control, which consequently seriously reduces the legal status of subjects of public control and the level of their importance both in the eyes of the people and public authorities, secondly, public authorities, in accordance with Article 16 of Federal Law No. 212-FZ of July 21, 2014, take into account the proposals, recommendations and conclusions contained in the final documents prepared based on the results of public control (that is, the law does not oblige them to comply in full).

However, in our opinion, this approach is not justified due to the fact that according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the multinational people of the country are the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the state, exercising their powers both directly (for example, through the institutions of free elections and referendums) and indirectly (in particular, through the activities of bodies public authorities and their officials). At the same time, delegated powers, as well as the activities of public and quasi-public authorities involved in the implementation of direct forms of democracy (for example, election commissions), need to be controlled by the people. Therefore, the institute of public control acts as the most important legal guarantee in the implementation of the constitutional principles of democracy and the participation of Russian citizens in the management of state affairs. And, consequently, the status of subjects of public control in interaction with subjects of state control is higher.

According to other authors, subjects of public control exercising their powers in full compliance with the current legislation have a priority position in relation to state control bodies, ^{[5, pp. 59-61]} with which they interact. Thus, A.V. Novikov rightly notes that "developed public control is a "lever" for the full functioning of the state, which manifests itself in a complex system of checks and balances in the implementation of the principle of separation of powers, in the openness and accessibility of state bodies, in their accountability to the whole people, in their interaction with the media, civil society institutions". ^{[11, p. 23]}

It seems that effective interaction of subjects of public and state control in Russia is hindered by a number of problems, among which the following can be attributed:

Firstly, the institution of public control is not formalized in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. It does not provide a mechanism for interaction with public authorities, including state control bodies. This circumstance significantly reduces the level of influence of this institution of civil society in the eyes of officials of public authorities (including subjects of state control).

Secondly, in the legislation on public control, the powers of its subjects, as we have already noted earlier, are not sufficient, which hinders, on the one hand, the effective and full-fledged organization and functioning of public control, and on the other hand, interaction with subjects of state control in the country.

Thirdly, in the legislation fixing the organization and activity of subjects of state control, in most cases there are no provisions regulating the procedure for their interaction with subjects of public control. Thus, in particular, Federal Constitutional Law No. 1-FKZ of February 26, 1997 "On the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation" does not contain a mechanism for interaction with subjects of public control. This circumstance reduces the effectiveness of interaction between subjects of state and public control.

Fourth, the current criminal and administrative legislation does not fix the measures of criminal and administrative responsibility for the actions (inaction) of public authorities, including the state control, for countering the legitimate actions of subjects of public control.

Fifth, to date, the mechanism of information and communication interaction between subjects of public and state control is insufficiently developed in the Russian Federation. This is largely due to the low level of funding for the organization and activities of subjects of public control, many of which do not even have their own websites (including on the Internet).

Conclusion.

To resolve the above-mentioned problems, as well as to ensure the effective work of subjects of public and state control, it is necessary to implement a system of measures, including by making appropriate amendments and additions both to the legislation on public control and to regulatory legal acts regulating the organization and activities of subjects of state control.

First, it is necessary to consolidate the institution of public control in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, detailing the mechanism of interaction of subjects of public control with public authorities, including subjects of state control. Alternatively, it is necessary to use the positive experience of the organization and functioning of the institute of people's control of power in the USSR. ^{[4, pp. 72-87]} So, in particular, the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 stipulated that "the organs of national control combine state control with public control ... control the implementation of state plans and tasks; fight against violations of state discipline, manifestations of localism, departmental approach to business, mismanagement and waste, red tape and bureaucracy; contribute to the improvement of the work of the state apparatus" (article 92).

Secondly, it is necessary to supplement the system of powers of subjects of public control with real powers that allow for the suppression of violations by objects of public control of the current legislation, as well as human and civil rights and freedoms. For example, it is necessary to grant subjects of public control the right to temporarily suspend acts and decisions of public authorities that are of a subordinate nature if they violate the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a wide range of citizens of the Russian Federation, with simultaneous appeal to the court or to a higher public authority to resolve this issue on the merits.

Thirdly, it is necessary to fix in the legislation regulating the organization and activity of subjects of state control, the provisions fixing the order of their interaction with subjects of public control. First of all, this concerns the prosecutor's office, the investigation and the court, since the federal constitutional and federal laws regulating their activities do not contain provisions regarding interaction with subjects of public control.

Fourth, it is necessary to fix in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses measures of criminal and administrative responsibility for the actions (inaction) of public authorities, including - state control - for countering the legitimate actions of subjects of public control.

For example, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented with Article 149.1 "Obstruction of the legitimate activities of representatives of subjects of public control", which should provide for criminal penalties for perpetrators for obstructing the legitimate activities of subjects of public control by forcing them to refuse to carry out this activity.

In turn, the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation should be supplemented with Article 5.70 "Violation of the legislation on public control of the Russian Federation", which should provide for administrative and legal responsibility of officials of public authorities, as well as other objects of public control, as for refusal to provide subjects of public control with information necessary for public control, and for preventing representatives of subjects of public control from visiting the relevant objects of public control.

Fifthly, it is necessary to adopt at the federal level a program for the development of the information and communication base of subjects of public control to ensure their interaction with public authorities in order to promptly exchange information on organized and ongoing public control events at the federal, regional and municipal levels. The financing of this program should be carried out at the expense of the federal budget, since regional and municipal budgets in most subjects of the Russian Federation are subsidized and are not able to provide additional financing for the organization and activities of numerous subjects of public control.

The implementation of these measures will not only provide a mechanism for effective, efficient and timely interaction of subjects of public and state control, but also will generally ensure the progressive development of this institution of civil society as the most important guarantee of the implementation, protection and protection of the constitutional principles of democracy and public participation in the management of state affairs.