Administrative liability of the local government bodies: problems of the effectiveness

Introduction. The increasing integration of local governments into a single system of public authority affects the analysis of all elements of the legal status of local governments, including such an element as legal responsibility. One of the types of legal responsibility, to which local governments are often involved, is administrative responsibility. The purpose of administrative responsibility is to prevent the commission of new administrative offenses.

Purpose. To prove the ineffectiveness of bringing local self-government bodies to administrative liability. To substantiate the thesis that local self-government bodies' officials should be held administratively responsible for failing to fulfill their powers.

Materials and Methods. The methodological basis of the study is an analysis of current legislation and current judicial practice of courts of general jurisdiction. The theoretical basis is provided by the works of Russian scholars who have studied the legal status and issues of administrative liability of public authorities.

Results. An analysis of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation reveals that the legislator is inconsistent in defining the subject of administrative offenses whose objective element is the failure to perform or improper performance of authority by a public authority. In cases specifically created for public authorities, the subjects of offenses are only public officials, while in general cases, both officials and legal entities are generally considered, allowing for the administrative liability of local governments if they have legal entity status. An analysis of judicial practice shows that the causes of administrative offenses include both a systemic problem of local self-government – inadequate financial and economic foundations – and the improper performance of authority by local government officials. The legislator generally takes these factors into account by establishing specific grounds for terminating proceedings in administrative offense cases. At the same time, bringing local government bodies to administrative responsibility does not fulfill the preventive function of administrative responsibility and does not ensure the proper execution of the powers of local government bodies in the future.

Conclusions. The author concludes that administrative liability is not an effective tool for preventing improper performance of powers by local government bodies, especially given the current challenges in maintaining their financial and economic foundations. The author proposes introducing a general provision into the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, according to which officials of public authorities are subject to administrative liability for failure to perform their powers, and supplementing the provisions of the current law on local selfgovernment with a detailed specification of the sectoral types of legal liability to which local government bodies and officials may be subject.

1. Vinnitsky A.V. On the Need for Legislative Enshrinement of the Institute of Legal Entities of Public Law. Journal of Russian Law. 2011;5(173):81–90. EDN: NRZYRN. (In Russ.)

2. Morozova N.A. Administrative Liability of Legal Entities: History, Theory, Practice: Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Law) Dissertation. Ekaterinburg; 2004. 22 p. EDN: ZMUBJH. (In Russ.)

3. Umanskaya V.P. Administrative Liability in the Sphere of Public Administration. Zakoni Rossii: opit, analiz, praktika. 2012; (3):42-46. EDN: OWFKHV. (In Russ.).

4. Kononov V.S. Legal Capacity of Public Authorities (Theoretical and Legal Research). Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Law) Dissertation. Moscow; 2025, 30 p. (In Russ.).

5. Knyazev S.D., Aranovsky K.V., Danilov Yu.M. Administrative-tort law in the constitutional prospects of codification. Law Enforcement Review; 2020;4(3):123–138. https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(3).123-138. EDN: IFLVPT. (In Russ.)