Abstract: The subject of this research is the social relations arising in the context of application of administrative sanctions for violating forestry legislation. The object of this research is the legislation on administrative offenses of the Russian Federation and foreign countries, law enforcement and judicial practice. The author observes the ambiguity of application of legislation on administrative offences by the state forestry departments in some constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Therefore, this scientific article indicates one of the relevant issues that stir up disputes among the law enforcement agencies – imposition of cumulative administrative penalty for violating forestry legislation. Using the universal dialectical, descriptive, and hermeneutical methods, the author analyzes the current administrative legal norms that regulate the procedure for imposition of cumulative administrative penalty. Special attention is given to the factors of ambiguity in law enforcement practice in terms of imposition of cumulative administrative penalty, which has developed due to the flaws in legal writing: 1) the absence of conceptual scientific developments dedicated to imposition of administrative penalty for cumulative administrative offenses; 2) simplified approach towards legal regulation of certain institutions of administrative responsibility that generates gaps in the legislation on administrative responsibility, which must filled in by law enforcement practice; 3) inappropriate interpretation of norms of the Article 4.4. of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences by the law enforcement, and namely, judicial bodies. The scientific novelty consists in recommendations for improving the provisions of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses in this sphere. The conclusions are based on the formal-legal and logical methods of research.

Abstract: The general tendency of the punitive policy formation in administrative responsibility legislation has influenced all the spheres of public management. The most serious administrative sanctions are established in the antimonopoly sphere, particularly for anticompetitive agreements. The Administrative Offences Code of the Russian Federation doesn’t differentiate them according to business entities, and it has a negative impact on the development of small and medium entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation. The author analyzes the introduced general and specific legal mechanisms of humanization of administrative responsibility and the problems of their practical realization. The research subject includes administrative norms regulating social relations in the sphere of imposition and implementation of administrative responsibility for anticompetitive agreements and realization of legal mechanisms of mitigation of legal responsibility and release from responsibility. The research object includes the article 14.32 of the Administrative Offences Code of the Russian Federation and the articles, establishing general and special legal instruments of mitigation of responsibility and release from responsibility for anticompetitive agreements, the judicial practice in the sphere of application of the Code’s provisions, related to the imposition and mitigation of administrative responsibility for anticompetitive agreements. The article is based on general scientific (analysis, synthesis, the system-structural, formal-logical and other methods) and special scientific methods of cognition (logical and legal, comparative-legal the method of legal hermeneutics (interpretation) and descriptive method). The author comes to the following conclusions:
-         The influence of the general tendency of administrative-punitive state policy is observed in the sphere of imposition of administrative responsibility for anticompetitive agreements;
-         The administrative sanctions for anticompetitive agreements, provided by the article 14.32. of the Administrative Offences Code of the Russian Federation, are very serious; the Administrative Offences Code doesn’t differentiate them according to business entities and it has a negative impact on the development of small and medium entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation;
-         The legislation provides for general and specific mechanisms, aimed at the mitigation of administrative responsibility and release from it for anticompetitive agreements, but the practical implementation of some of them is quite problematic;
-         The introduction of more flexible criteria, helping take into account the property and financial status of various business entities, brought to administrative responsibility, seems to be reasonable;
-         In order to improve the legislation in this sphere and provide the uniformity of application of juridical terminology, the author proposes to insert the term “cartel” not only in the comment, but also in the disposition of the article 14.32. of the Administrative Offences Code; to differentiate the volume of sanctions depending on the category of business entities. 

Abstract: The research subject covers administrative procedural rules regulating a special group of homogeneous social relations arising, transforming, and ceasing in the process of disposition of controversial administrative cases, and form an independent legal institution of administrative law – the institution of administrative jurisdiction. The research object includes the subject and the method of legal regulation of administrative jurisdiction, the system of subjects of this legal institution, the role of administrative jurisdiction within administrative law. The study is based on general scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, the system-structural, formal logical and other methods, and special scientific methods including the legal logical, comparative legal, the method of legal hermeneutics (interpretation), and the descriptive method of cognition. The author concludes that:
1) at present the science of administrative law doesn’t contain any single position on the concept of administrative jurisdiction; the author supposes that it would be more correct not to reduce administrative jurisdiction to only one form of administrative procedure – legal proceedings on administrative violations.
2) the unification of administrative-jurisdictional rules regulating legal proceedings on administrative violations, legal proceedings on complaints, disciplinary proceedings, and conciliation proceedings into a special legal institution is conditioned by the recent situation in social relations having common features and requiring a special administrative-legal impact
3) the institution of administrative jurisdiction has its subject and method of legal regulation, subject matter and structure.
The research novelty lies in the author’s definition of the concept of administrative jurisdiction as one of the main institutions of administrative law.