Codification of Norms on Judicial Consideration of Cases on Administrative Offenses: Experience of 16 Neighboring Countries

The article discusses the evolution of legislation concerning the judicial review of administrative offense cases across post-Soviet countries. It concludes that the Fundamentals of the Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics on Administrative Offenses, adopted in 1980, represented only a partial codification of administrative-procedural norms. However, this legislative act established a tradition of fully codifying administrative tort and related procedural laws, merging judicial and non-judicial processes for handling administrative offense cases into a unified proceeding. In the post-Soviet period, despite this legacy, nearly all neighboring countries have seen a consistent trend of judicial proceedings separating from non-judicial ones in the realm of administrative offenses. Integrating judicial procedures into the administrative procedure code is an exception rather than a rule; instead, these procedures often resemble criminal proceedings, sometimes even referencing criminal procedure codes. Nevertheless, even within the administrative-jurisdictional system, judicial procedures increasingly diverge from non-judicial ones, either evolving into separate procedural institutions or prevailing as the primary procedural framework. In this context, the Author aligns with the views of Yu. P. Solovey and P. P. Serkov, who argue that proceedings on administrative offenses are distinct from public-law dispute resolution, and that judicial consideration of administrative offenses differs fundamentally from non-judicial administrative-jurisdictional activities. Consequently, the article concludes that judicial and non-judicial reviews of administrative-tort cases do not form a single, cohesive administrative offense proceeding. Anticipating future developments in Russian legislation, based on comparative legal analysis, the Author suggests that the adoption of a Procedural Code on Administrative Offenses may serve only as a temporary measure. In the near future, the need to establish a separate procedural law governing administrative offense cases in courts of general jurisdiction may arise.