Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Actual problems of Russian law
Reference:

Romanova, I. Legal consequences of disclosure of corruptogenic factors in normative legal acts and their drafts by the prosecution bodies

Abstract: The article is devoted to the study of legal consequences of the requests by the prosecutors to amend a normative legal act based upon the results of anti-corruption expertise. The author discusses topical issues regarding the period for the consideration of the requirements by the law-making bodies, options for challenging the requirements and cases when protest of a prosecutor was filed instead. The author views the cases when the prosecutors sent information on the corruptogenic factors, which they have found. It is due to the fact, that the information acts should be filed when corruptogenic factors are uncovered in legal acts formally falling outside the scope of prosecutor control under the Federal Law «On Anti-Corruption expertise of Normative Legal Acts and Drafts of Normative Legal Acts» (such as legislative drafts, non-normative legal acts). If, while holding anti-corruption expertise, a law (or a legal norm) is found to be in contradiction with the federal law, the protest of prosecutor is used. Special attention is paid to the legislative provisions for the prosecutors to require amendments into normative legal acts in court; the author offers possible solutions for the problems.


Keywords:

anti-corruption expertise, prosecution, requirement to amend, protest, challenging decisions, normative legal act, fighting corruption, corruptogenic factor, information, petition by a prosecutor.


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Badmatsyrenova Yu.S. Problemy realizatsii polnomochiy organov prokuratury pri provedenii antikorruptsionnoy ekspertizy // Ekspertiza normativnykh pravovykh aktov i ikh proektov na predmet korruptsiogennosti: znachenie, soderzhanie, metodika provedeniya: sb. statey. — M., 2010.
2. Vinokurov A.Yu. K voprosu ob obyazatel'nosti ispolneniya trebovaniy prokurora // Materi-aly nauchnoy konferentsii «Obespechenie edinogo pravovogo prostranstva». MosGU, 25 noya-brya 2010 g. — M.: Izd-vo Moskovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta, 2011.
3. Dorokhov A.N. Zayavlenie prokurora v sud kak sposob ustraneniya korruptsiogennogo faktora iz normativnogo pravovogo akta // Ekspertiza normativnykh pravovykh aktov i ikh proektov na predmet korruptsiogennosti: soderzhanie, znachenie, metodika provedeniya / pod obshch. red. O.S. Kapinus i A.V. Kudashkina. Akad. Gen. prokuratury RF. — M., 2010.
4. Edlin V.A. Kommentariy k FZ ot 17.07.09 g. ¹172-FZ «Ob antikorruptsionnoy ekspertize norma-tivnykh pravovykh aktov i proektov normativnykh pravovykh aktov» // SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus».
5. Dmitriev D.A., Kudashkin A.V. Antikorruptsionnaya ekspertiza, provodimaya organami proku-ratury. Voprosy sovershenstvovaniya pravovogo regulirovaniya // Administrativnoe pravo i praktika administrirovaniya. — 2013. — ¹ 3. — C. 158–177