3. Поняття та ознаки Адмін. Процесу.

Згідно зі ст. 3 КАСУ Адмін. судочинство — діяльність Адмін. судів щодо розгляду і вирішення Адмін. справ у порядку, встановленому КАСУ.

АДМІН. судочинство спрямоване на захист прав, свобод та інтересів осіб у сфері публічно-правових відносин від порушень з боку суб'єктів владних повноважень (органів державної влади, органів місцевого самоврядування, їхніх посадових і службових осіб, інших суб'єктів при здійсненні ними владних управлінських функцій на основі законодавства, в тому числі на виконання делегованих повноважень).

Незважаючи на те, що терміни "Адмін. судочинство" і "Адмін. процес" можуть вживатися як тотожні, у КАСУ (пункти 4 - 5 коментованої статті) їх розмежовано.

АДМІН. судочинство - це діяльність Адмін. суду щодо розгляду і вирішення Адмін. справ, а Адмін. процес - це правовідносини, що складаються під час здійснення Адмін. судочинства. Термін "Адмін. процес" найчастіше вживається в Кодексі у словосполученні "учасники Адмін. процесу".

У вітчизняній науці радянського і пострадянського періоду категорія "Адмін. процес" розглядається переважно у ширшому значенні. До Адмін. процесу у широкому розумінні включили різного роду діяльність органів влади щодо розгляду і вирішення конкретних справ, які виникають у сфері управління. Часто в структуру Адмін. процесу включають також порядок прийняття "нормативних актів управління". У Кодексі прийнято концепцію вузького розуміння Адмін. процесу як однієї з категорій правосуддя в Адмін. справах.

Ознаками Адмін. судочинства є:

1) Адмін. судочинство є формою реалізації Адмін. права як права матеріального;

2) спрямоване на регулювання публічно правових відносин;

3) одним із суб’єктів завжди виступає суб’єкт владних повноважень;

4) наявність публічного інтересу;

5) наявність специфічного, лише йому притаманного, методу імперативно диспозитивного з певними особливостями;

6) його норми встановлюються ВРУ, що є Вищим органом законодавчої влади;

7) воно знаходиться як у законах України, так і міжнародних нормативно-правових актах.

4. Принципи Адмін.Процесу.

З'ясуванню сутності Адмін. процесу значною мірою сприяє аналіз його принципів, вихідних, засадничих ідей, згідно з якими здійснюють Адмін.-процесуальну діяльність.

 Стаття 7. Принципи адміністративного судочинства

     1. Принципами здійснення правосуддя в адміністративних судах є:

     1) верховенство права;

     2) законність;

     3) рівність усіх учасників адміністративного процесу перед законом і судом;

     4) змагальність сторін, диспозитивність та офіційне з'ясування всіх обставин у справі;

     5) гласність і відкритість адміністративного процесу;

     6) забезпечення апеляційного та касаційного оскарження рішень адміністративного суду, крім випадків, установлених цим Кодексом; { Пункт 6 частини першої статті 7 із змінами, внесеними згідно із Законом N 2453-VI ( 2453-17 ) від 07.07.2010 }

     7) обов'язковість судових рішень.

Принцип законності становить найважливіший принцип Адмін. процесу й характеризується як режим відповідності суспільних відносин, що виникають у цій сфері, законам і підзаконним актам держави, атмосфера взаємодії та взаємостосунків держави й громадян.

Реалізація принципу законності в Адмін.-процесуальній сфері спирається на низку умов, до яких слід віднести єдність законності, верховенство права, гарантованість прав і свобод громадян, недопустимість протиставлення законності та доцільності, невідворотність стягнення за порушення закону.

Принцип правової рівності ґрунтується на конституційних положеннях про рівність громадян перед законом. Відповідно до ст. 24 КУ громадяни мають рівні конституційні права й свободи та є рівними перед законом. Не може бути привілеїв чи обмежень за ознаками раси, кольору шкіри, політичних, релігійних та інших переконань, статі, етнічного й соціального походження, майнового стану, місця проживання, за мовними або іншими ознаками. Наведене повною мірою стосується й інших суб'єктів Адмін. процесу, тобто вимоги закону однаково поширюються на всі без винятку державні органи та їх посадових осіб, що здійснюють Адмін.-процесуальну діяльність. Своє конкретне втілення принцип правової рівності знаходить у формуванні правового статусу суб'єктів Адмін. процесу.

Принцип охорони інтересів особи та держави. Найважливішим завданням діяльності державних органів є охорона конституційного ладу нашої держави, встановленого порядку управління, державного та суспільного порядку. Це завдання реалізують з метою охорони інтересів держави, однак при цьому в демократичному, правовому суспільстві забезпечення охорони інтересів держави слугує підставою додержання інтересів усіх законослухняних членів цього суспільства. Ось чому забезпечення охорони інтересів держави тісно пов'язано із забезпеченням охорони інтересів особи взагалі та громадян держави зокрема. Тут наявний зворотний зв'язок. Охорона інтересів особи, громадянина — найважливіший чинник стабільності цивільного суспільства і, отже, належного функціонування державного апарату та держави в цілому.

Принцип офіційності Адмін. процесу виражається в закріпленні обов'язку державних органів, їх посадових осіб здійснювати розгляд і вирішення індивідуально-конкретних справ і пов'язані з цим дії (збирання необхідних матеріалів і доказів) від імені держави й переважно за державний рахунок.

Принцип об'єктивної істини спрямований на повне виключення з процесу проявів суб'єктивізму, однобічності в аналізі дій суб'єктів процесу, покликаний забезпечити встановлення та оцінку реальних фактів, які мають значення для прийняття обґрунтованого рішення у конкретній Адмін.й справі. Не випадково, наприклад, законодавець як основне завдання в справі про Адмін. порушення закріпив необхідність своєчасного, всебічного, повного й об'єктивного з'ясування обставин кожної справи, вирішення її точно відповідно до законодавства. З такою необхідністю законодавець пов'язує оцінку досліджуваних у ході розгляду справи доказів.

Принцип гласності. Втілення в життя цього принципу обумовлено потребою широкої поінформованості суспільства про діяльність державних органів, їх посадових осіб щодо здійснення Адмін.-процесуальних функцій. Поряд із правом громадян на одержання інформації про діяльність органів держави, закріпленим у ст. 43 ЗУ «Про інформацію» від 2 жовтня 1992 р., законодавець прямо зобов'язує відповідні органи повідомляти громадян про прийняті ними рішення. Так, ст. 14 ЗУ «Про об'єднання громадян» вказує на необхідність для легалізуючого органу повідомляти про офіційне визнання об'єднання громадян у засобах масової інформації. Окремі урядові постанови майже повністю присвячено питанням інформування громадян.

Принцип здійснення процесу державною мовою й забезпечення права користуватися рідною мовою відбиває найважливіший аспект діяльності всіх державних органів, їх посадових осіб — повагу національної гідності всіх громадян України. Розгляд конкретних справ ведуть державною мовою України, проте громадянин, який не володіє українською мовою, може брати участь у процесі, користуючись своєю рідною мовою. При цьому йому повною мірою забезпечують одержання всієї необхідної інформації і можливість донести власну інформацію до відома органу або посадової особи, що розглядає конкретну Адмін. справу. На це спрямовано участь у процесі такої процесуальної фігури, як перекладач.

Принцип презумпції невинуватості та правомірності дій громадян. Додержання цього принципу має слугувати основною передумовою для ходу й результатів юрисдикційного Адмін. процесу. Основні риси презумпції невинуватості громадян полягають у тому, що вони відбивають об'єктивне правове становище, що виражає думку держави стосовно винуватості особи або правомірності її дій, а не думку конкретних суб'єктів процесу. Доказування невинуватості або правомірності дій особи є її правом, а не обов'язком. Особу вважають невинною у вчиненні Адмін. правопорушення або її дії вважають правомірними, доки винність особи або неправомірність її дій не буде доведено в установленому законом порядку, а сама постанова або рішення в конкретній справі не повинні грунтуватися на припущеннях.

Принцип швидкості та економічності процесу обумовлений оперативністю виконавчо-розпорядчої діяльності державних органів. Визначення конкретних, порівняно невеликих строків розгляду та вирішення Адмін.ї справи є чинником, який, з одного боку, виключає зволікання, а з іншого — дозволяє впорядкувати рух справ, увести процес у визначені часові рамки. Порівняно з кримінальним і цивільним процесами ведення більшості Адмін. справ з матеріального погляду є менш обтяжливим для держави. Однак це не означає, що певні фінансові витрати й організаційні труднощі мають стати на заваді належному веденню процесу, забезпеченню захисту прав і законних інтересів громадян.

Принцип самостійності в прийнятті рішення насамперед виключає будь-яке втручання інших органів і посадових осіб у Адмін.-процесуальну діяльність суб'єктів, уповноважених вести процес. З іншого боку, це дає змогу підвищити відповідальність за прийняття рішень, сприяє їх законності та обґрунтованості. Неухильне проведення в життя цього принципу не дозволяє органу або посадовій особі перекладати обов'язки щодо вирішення справ, які належать до їх компетенції, на інші, в тому числі, нижчі інстанції.

Слід відзначити, що втілення в життя названих принципів Адмін. процесу стає можливим за допомогою спеціально встановлених для цього процесуальних способів і засобів. Вони складають активну характеристику Адмін.-процесуальної діяльності, утворюють її організаційну основу та виступають своєрідним процесуальним інструментарієм.

1. Administrative law - one of the most important means of regulating social relations, used by the State in the process of management, and ensure a smooth operation of the state apparatus. Through the norms of administrative law, the state, through its authorized agencies enforces important organizational measures of economic, social and cultural nature to meet social needs and ensure normal living conditions of its citizens.

Administrative law establishes the legal and organizational forms of citizen participation in government, establishes rules of conduct for officers for the competent authorities and officials, and for ordinary citizens.

            Administrative law govern the large complex administrative relations arising in connection with the organization of state regulation of the economy, social and cultural development, administrative and political system.

            Administrative law - an independent branch of the legal system for the regulation of social relations in the process of organizing and executive and administrative activities of government.

            Administrative law is intended to regulate the social relations that occur (added), develop and terminate in state regulation and control. These social relations arise concerning the implementation by government administrative functions. Therefore, the subject of administrative law are actually public relations management and control.

            Legal regulation of social relations in the field of public administration is ensured by setting forth in the rules of administrative law rules of conduct binding on all members of regulated relations.

            Specific social relations is the management, and therefore subject to the regulatory effect of administrative law in the following cases:

1) When it necessarily involved the appropriate governmental authority (official);

2) when the Authority has implemented the powers conferred on him by the state for management.

Among the management include the following public relations:

- Between the executive authorities of the State in order of hierarchical subordination;

- Between different non-subordinated, government;

- Between governments and their subordinate state enterprises and organizations;

- Between the government and private enterprises and organizations;

- Between the government and citizens.

            Administrative and legal regulation of these various public relations management by using common methods, ie population means or methods of the regulatory impact of law on social relations inherent in the very nature of law. There are the following methods:

1. Prescription - imposition direct legal obligation to perform a certain action as prescribed regulations (to do so, and not otherwise);

2. Ban - laying direct legal obligation not to do a certain action as prescribed regulations;

3. Permission - legal permission to perform in the conditions provided legal norm or that action on your own.

Consequently, the administrative and legal regulation is designed for such a social relationship in which the position of the parties to exclude the legal equality, they are in a relationship of subordination.

2) Administrative Justice

The emergence and development of the institution of administrative justice is largely due to the realization of the theory of separation of powers. Because of this increasing role of the judiciary when dealing with legal disputes between the administration and citizens and the officials ceased to be judges in their own backyard.

Now many countries (Germany, France, and Sweden), the Institute of Administrative Justice got its legalization. Foreign experience of the functioning of this important legal institution allows him to distinguish two main types: 1) implementation of the administrative and jurisdictional activities by general courts, and 2) the implementation of such activities by special administrative courts.

The main feature of administrative justice is manifested in its organizational separation from the organs and structures that perform executive functions. Administrative justice - that justice, the judicial branch. However, it is a separate branch of the administration of justice. The process in the administrative courts, despite some of the features like built general litigation.

For Ukraine, the Institute of Administrative Justice - is not new. Legislation short period of the independent Ukrainian state (1917 - 1920 gg.) Does not manage his attention to the activities of administrative justice. The Constitution of the Ukrainian People's Republic in 1918 found that the judiciary in civil, criminal and administrative law is exclusively judicial. In this administratinno-jurisdictional activity of administrative bodies is limited by law.

The draft of the Basic Law of the State of the UPR during the period of the Directory (1920) involves the introduction of the judicial system of Ukraine's Supreme Administrative Court. This court should consider and decide, following the court order, the question of the legality of orders of administrative bodies and local authorities.

Now you can point out on Administrative Justice. First, the implementation of judicial justice in administrative matters. Administrative justice - that justice, rather than administrative activity. Second, the process of administrative affairs built like a general court: it is transparent, public, has the elements of competition. In this specific administrative affairs such that they require special consideration of organizational forms and special judicial qualifications, because the solution requires administrative cases than perfect knowledge of legislation, primarily administrative, and more knowledge of government and other sectors.

Thus, the administrative justice - is the legal procedure for the consideration and decision in the judicial procedural form of cases that arise in the field of public administration between the citizens or legal entities, on the one hand, and the government (officials), - on the other, carried out general or specially created to resolve legal disputes by the courts.

In general, administrative justice is one of the limitations of executive power, and administrative courts - a means of implementing the principle of separation of powers, an additional protective mechanism of subjective rights and freedoms of citizens.

Need for fundamental reform of the administrative and jurisdictional authorities due to a number of factors.

First of all, it is a high enough level of quality review of administrative cases collective bodies (administrative committees, executive committees and village councils). One can hardly talk about the professionalism of its members who work in these bodies on a voluntary basis.

Not always objectively examine and authorities that control functions (eg, various government inspection), as often it is a failure to certain provisions of the same bodies and their officials in many cases do not have legal training, which means low level of legal training of administrative and jurisdictional authorities.

According to the concept of judicial reform in Ukraine, adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on 28 April 1992, Ukraine introduced administrative proceedings, the purpose of which is to address disputes between citizens and government.

The above provisions are their real embodiment in the law of Ukraine "On the Judicial System of Ukraine", then - in LU "On the Judicial System and Status of Judges". In accordance with this law the judiciary in Ukraine implemented by the administration of justice in the form of civil, commercial, administrative, criminal, and constitutional proceedings.

The judicial system of Ukraine is composed of ordinary courts and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. In turn, the system of courts of general jurisdiction based on the principles of territoriality and specialization. Some of the specialized courts are courts and administrative courts.

Local administrative courts are the district courts, which are created in the district in accordance with the decree of the President of Ukraine. Local administrative courts hear administrative cases related to legal relations in the field of public administration and local self-government (the case of administrative jurisdiction), except for cases of administrative jurisdiction in the field of military control, are considering military courts. The next link in the system of administrative courts are the administrative courts of appeal, the appellate districts created in accordance with the decree of the President of Ukraine. The authority of the courts of appeal are:

1) Appellate review in accordance with the procedural law;

2) review in the first instance cases determined by law;

3) maintenance and analysis of judicial statistics, studies and compilation of jurisprudence;

4) To provide guidance to the local court in applying the law.

The highest judicial body in the administrative court is the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine. Its powers include the consideration of cases on appeal, management and analysis of judicial statistics, studies and generalization of judicial practice, provide guidance to lower-level courts, and to give them guidance and clarification on the application of the law.

In the Supreme Court of Ukraine, which acts as the supreme body in the system of courts of general jurisdiction, the Trial Chamber is acting in administrative matters.

Thus, Ukraine has established a system of administrative courts, designed to ensure justice for administrative affairs, real defend and protect the rights and freedoms of citizens in their relations with government agencies and officials.

2. The traditional characteristics of administrative justice

Judicial control over the administration (management action enforcement authorities, officials, state and municipal employees) in the Russian Federation called the administration of justice, at least - the justice in administrative matters. Administrative Justice as a scientific problem in many papers, in which she is seen in the historical, legal, content and comparative legal aspects. The scientists studied the problem of administrative justice in Tsarist Russia and in the Soviet period and the period 1991-2001. In 1997, we published a number of articles in which the authors attempt to explore the concept of "administrative justice", its features, and legal features of the prospects of this institution in the Russian Federation.

As noted, the problem of administrative justice in the process of development has undergone a shift of the most opposite opinions from "the institution of administrative justice is alien to Soviet law" (1925), "in Soviet law can not be an administrative claim" (1947), " whether administrative justice in Soviet law "to" need Administrative Court "(1988), from the" exercise control of the judiciary by the rules of adversary justice is a dead end "to the belief that" the jurisdictional control over the legality of government finally that stand out from the civil justice system as a structural and a procedural sense and will get all appropriate institutional components (1997).

One of the classic scientific definition of "administrative justice" proposed DM Chechetov "Administrative Justice - is the procedure for consideration and resolution in the procedural form of judicial disputes in the field of administration between the citizens or legal entities, on the one hand, and administrative bodies - on the other, carried jurisdictional bodies, specially created for resolving legal disputes. " A critical approach to this definition reveals there is one major contradiction to resolve disputes shall judicial procedure form, and cases are jurisdictional bodies, that is, not only the courts but also other, non-judicial, authorities. However, a marked contradiction is resolved if one interprets the concept of administrative justice in the broad sense, taking into account the existence of several of its models in different countries. NG Salishcheva defines the concept of administrative justice in terms of its supervisory capacity: a system of external control over the actions of administrative bodies and their officials against citizens. This definition is the most extensive, reflecting the purpose of the administrative justice system, the rights and freedoms of citizens. NY Hamaneva realizing administrative justice as a system of special organs which exercise control in governance, considers it necessary to create an integrated system of administrative courts separate from the general proceedings. AK Solovyov highlights the problem of administrative justice are three main aspects: 1) the material associated with the nature of the dispute (administrative and legal dispute), 2) organizational, due to the presence of special bodies to address these disputes, and 3) a formal, that is, availability of special procedural rules and consideration of public law disputes.

Under the traditional approach of administrative justice has the following common features:

1. Existence of a legal dispute (administrative, legal, administrative dispute) of public law arising in connection with the implementation of public administration, executive, management activities of state and municipal employees, officers, ie, in the field of management. However, consideration of the dispute is in the application of not only the public but also private law.

Administrative and legal dispute is a public law nature, he is a type of legal conflict. The administrative and legal literature this problem has attracted the attention of scientists only in the last decade. Since the administrative proceedings is understood to date in two forms - the consideration of administrative cases and complaints of individuals and entities on actions (inaction) and regulations governing state and municipal bodies, their officials, state and local government employees (administrative justice) - that and his subjects are, on the one hand, the administrative offense, and on the other - an administrative dispute (dispute as to administrative). Therefore, to describe the subject of administrative proceedings are encouraged to use a more general category - "administrative and legal conflict."

Administrative and legal dispute (in the sense of administrative justice) is a legal conflict or legal conflict arising between state bodies, local self-government officials (on one side) and the other entities (the other side) for breach of subjective public rights natural or legal persons, the unlawful exercise of the administrative rule-making, administrative and legal disputes are resolved by the courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts within the established legal procedures to ensure the full implementation of the established administrative and legal status of entities whose rights and freedoms have been violated. Thus, judicial review is a procedural and legal way to resolve administrative disputes. That judicial procedure form provides equality of procedural provisions in judicial proceedings - the state and municipal authorities and natural or legal persons. In connection with this we can agree with all the arguments of the authors, which establishes the legal equality of the parties in the administrative and legal dispute, and point to their unequal position in the administrative and legal regulatory terms. Very interesting proposition AK Solovieva that exploring the substantive aspects of administrative justice, said that the commission of unlawful acts, the failure of officials of their assigned duties, publication administrations illegal acts constitute an offense that emphasizes the legal nature of the administrative dispute .

2. Administrative and legal disputes are resolved in the framework of the administration of justice, that is, administrative justice - is the judiciary.

3. Legal protection of subjective public rights of citizens is one of the main purposes of administrative justice. It is a violation of public rights is the subject of administrative justice, with disorders caused by illegal actions and decisions of the government and officials can apply to other subjective rights of citizens and legal persons.

4. Administrative tribunal, to a certain extent, independent from other branches of government (and other governments), and from the courts of law, and they also carry out external monitoring of executive power, that is, the judicial supervision of the authorities and their officials; often these are called quasi-judicial bodies, as their activities are different from the activities of the general courts dealing in the traditional civil procedure.

5. For the administration of justice characterized by the existence of special subjects "administrative yustitsionnogo" relationship (citizens, public authorities, entities executive officers), officials (judges), the dispute is heard in management, have specialized knowledge and expertise in specific areas of functioning executive.

6. Administrative and legal disputes (ie, disputes of citizens and other entities with a public authority) or the jurisdiction of courts of law, or by special administrative courts, separate from the ordinary courts, or the so-called quasi-judicial bodies.

7. Administrative jurisdiction is established by the rules of procedural law, ensuring that legal dispute formal (procedural) equality, that is, within a specially created grievance procedures (or claims). In considering the administrative case is subject to all the principles of the administrative process (publicity, of oral, fairness, competitiveness, spontaneity, and so on). In some countries, such as the former Soviet republics, have laws on administrative judicial procedure.

8. Legal, "the result of" administrative process is recognition yustitsionnogo Administrative Court (general court, quasi-judicial bodies) illegality or invalidity (or, on the contrary, the rule of law and fact) received government (officials) or administrative acts committed by their actions (or inaction).

DN Bachrach proposes to distinguish between administrative justice in the broad and narrow sense. In a broad sense, it is a law administered by complaints of citizens about the legitimacy of the government and officials (this includes also the civil cases for claims of citizens to the executive branch on the restoration work, for damages caused by the illegal actions of state bodies of illegal for a warrant of living space, etc.). In a narrow sense, the administration of justice by the courts means the consideration of complaints by citizens against acts of officers (employees) and controls. Judicial review on the basis of special rules (special appeal) is installed in special legislation (for example, the procedure for appealing the decision on a case concerning an administrative offense, Art. 267 of the Administrative Code).

Very interesting understanding of administrative justice as a legal means and at the same time a means of resolving legal conflicts. Traditionally, legal conflict mean differences or contradictions between different regulations that govern the same or related public relations and contradictions that arise in the course of enforcement and implementation of the public authorities and officials of certain powers to them. Legal conflicts impede the implementation of the citizens of their rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, to break down the legal protection of these rights, violate the legal regime of the legal acts of governance, hinder the achievement of efficiency of the administrative rulemaking. Therefore, administration of justice contained in it using the right-pravovosstanovitelny a security and legal capacity, may contribute to the resolution of legal conflicts. Moreover, the use of administrative law yustitsionnogo can promote the effective use and other ways to resolve legal conflicts. For example: to provide interpretation of legal acts and the adoption of a new act, repeal of the old Act, changes, additions or revisions to existing regulations; systematization of legislation, maintenance of the negotiation process and the optimization of law, the relationship of theory and practice. Thus, the administration of justice is a necessary attribute (attribute) of a modern constitutional state can provide legal (legal) way to overcome the legal conflicts arising in the field of human rights and freedoms of man and citizen, and in the area of ​​judicial review of the legality of acts of management.

In Western European countries, the term "administrative justice", which played a positive role in the creation of legal protection from the actions and decisions of public administration and its agencies, is widespread in the XIX century. When judicial control of the administration stood out in some areas of state testing and proceedings.

At the beginning of XX century., As well as today, there are two approaches to the practical organization of administrative justice, which reflect two opposing views on this legal institution: the first approach was to subordinate questions of public law courts of general jurisdiction (doctrine of the single justice), and the second - subordinated to questions of public law jurisdiction in the administration of a special judicial-administrative boards, which were established in the department to control (the doctrine of special administrative courts). These two areas of theory correspond two systems organization of administrative justice in practice: a single administrative justice was created in England, the North American States, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the system of special panels was installed in office management in France, Spain, Portugal, and in Prussia and other German states.

ADMIN. Justice, Admin.protsess and Admin.sudochynstvo in Ukraine.

ADMIN.yustytsiya (Ai) - System specials. judicial bodies established to address and resolve disputes about the law, procedural law in a particular form, arising out of the activities of public administration between citizens or legal person, on the one hand, and by publ. Administration and their positions. persons, on the other, resulting in a decision can be made about the annulment and / or annulment of the illegal act or other .. restoration of the subjective right of the person concerned.

Signs Admin.yustytsiyi:

1.yavlyaye a justice. Symptom "adm .." indicates a presence Admin.elementa and Admin.yustytsiyi organization (in terms of personnel), and in the manner of its operation (elements Admin.protsesu), the nature of cases that are resolved by Admin.yustytsiyi (publ . disputes).

2. all systems Ai characteristic referring to its jurisdiction disputes arising in the field of public activity between citizens or legal person, on the one hand, and other publications. Administration - the other.

3. inherent in a system of judicial bodies competent to review the claims referred to the actions or inaction of state. of the scope publ.diyalnosti.

4. also characterized by the presence of specific process. action in individual cases. Mechanism of cases in Admin.sudah built like a trial in zah.sudah and almost completely reproduces its principles (transparency, openness, competition). At the same time one of the parties Admin. Cha. dispute - publ. body or official actions or omissions complained Xia.

5. etc. resulting dispute in management body ayu is nullity and / or annulment of the illegal act or other restoration of the subjective right of the person concerned. Availability of Ai - an indicator of maturity judicial organization and the degree of development of different forms of justice, a necessary attribute Democrat. rule of law.

ADMIN.sudochynstvo (AU) - regulatory defined activity Admin.sudiv Review and resolve Admin.sprav who raised over legal disputes arising between the publ.Administratsiyi and nat. and legal person on the restoration of the subjective right of the person concerned. AS is an integral component of Ai.

ADMIN.sudy provide accurate and consistent implementation of existing legislation by examining specific cases in court. ADMIN.sudy the rules Admin.protsesu hear cases related solely to the public Ave. legal relationship, that is, in which at least one party is an executive authority, mists.samovryad. their official or employee or others. entity that provides power management functions on the basis of legislation, including the exercise of delegated powers.

ADMIN.protses (AP) - resolved norms APP relationship arising between Admin.sudom, parties and so on. Admin.spravy participants, about the consideration and resolution of this court publ.-pr. disputes, parties which are, firstly, the subjects of state-power, and secondly, Phys. and legal person.

AP and Admin.protsedura is external. manifestation of relevant judicial and executive. It is therefore unacceptable to equate these two processes, which are attributes of two independent of each other branches of government.

Value of AP and Admin. procedure:

1) common - they pct .. nature, which manifests itself in the activities of the state. power. Both are external. expression of exercise of the state. power of its powers conferred by these bodies to ensure the rights, freedoms and interests nat .. those performance goals.

2) AP and Admin.protsedura is pct .. expression of the activity of the different branches of government: the AP is inextricably linked with the protection of rights, freedoms and interests nat .. persons solely in the courts, consideration and settlement of disputes Admin.sudamy publ.-pr. character, then Admin.protsesudra - expression of organizational and administrative activities of public administration.

 AP - legal category that takes place exclusively within specialized activities (adm.). Court; Admin.protsedura - legal category exclusively extrajudicial.

2. Becoming Admin.yi Justice in Ukraine.

- First stage: the emergence of Admin. Justice of the Russian Empire period of the second half of XIX - the first decades of the twentieth century;

- Second phase: 1905-1921rr. - Formation of Admin. Justice during the UPR and the national democratic revolution;

- Third stage: 1921-1991 he. - Admin. proceedings of the USSR;

- The fourth phase: 1991 to 2005. - Development Admin. Justice of the independent Ukraine.

Introduction Admin.yi Justice in the Ukraine

    Constitution of Ukraine provides that all legal in this country provided judicial protection and everyone is guaranteed the right to challenge in court the decisions, actions or inaction by state agencies, local governments and their officials.

    In modern society, any relationship with the potential dangers escalate into conflict, especially the relationship between citizens and government. Citizens deprived levers of power, and therefore in a relationship with her is defenseless. Everyone's right to challenge in court the decisions, actions or omissions of public authorities, local governments and their officials is an important guarantee of the constitutional principle of state responsibility for their actions to the people. That is why in modern democracies importance to guarantee human rights in its relations with the authorities granted legal protection by an independent and authoritative body - the court before which the citizens and the Administration are equal.

Ukrainian way of becoming Admin. Justice was longer than the European average. And this despite the fact that the basic foundations were laid back in that distant time when our country was part of the Russian Empire.

              Ukraine's judicial system is a collection of all vessels built in accordance with their competence, tasks and goals and is based on the constitutional principles of justice. According to Art. 124 of the Constitution of Ukraine and art. With the Law "On the Judicial System" judicial ¬ chynstvo in Ukraine by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and courts of general jurisdiction., In turn courts of general juris ¬ diction include general courts and specialized courts (commercial courts and administrative courts).

In Ukraine's judicial system administrative courts are relatively new structural formations we ¬ on other courts of general juris ¬ diction. Although opinions about the need to create such a branch specialized courts expressed a long time, the first real steps towards their implementation started recently. It should be noted that the issue of the need for such courts violated a long time and, in some way, they know ¬ walked practical implementation. Analysis of legislation and scientific theories ¬ cal thought Tsarist Russia, which included Ukraine, give reasons highlight the following important steps towards the creation and development Administra ¬ tive courts:

- The creation of administrative justice, including: provincial prysutstviy (considered a limited number of administrative cases (about taxes, military duty, breach of police regulations of the county and police affairs), county and city police departments, provincial administrations, governors-general and Governor ¬ tors; 1st Department of the Senate (which in some cases acted as the first and last instance). Describing the activities of the orga ¬ well, Russian administratyvist Ivan T. Tarasov believed that "1st State Traffic ¬ tament Senate as the highest administrative court in the Empire is in our legislation as if the dome without a home and foundation, because no medium or lower overall judicial and administrative courts or administrative courts do not exist, and weak similarity of these courts is, of course, can not fill this significant gap ";

- Predictions Stolypin in its program of necessary administrative courts, which have not been established;

- The adoption of the Interim Government AOR May 1917 decision on the introduction of courts in administrative matters and approval of the relevant provisions of which read as follows: 1) the judiciary in the administrative court divided into three instances: administra ¬ tion judge District Court, 1st Department Pravytelstvuyuchoho Senate, 2) in its official status administrative judge was equated to the members of the District Court, enjoy the right to non-variability and could not be transferred without the consent of the district court for consideration of criminal and civil cases, and 3) the administrative judge had to be appointed from among persons with higher legal education and experience necessary to the practice of law, and 4) clearly divided powers between the administrative and district courts.

Decree of November 22, 1917 № 1 on the court concluded the activity of the old judicial system, including administrative ¬ these courts. Instead of pre-revolutionary courts created new courts that dealt with criminal and civil cases. Administrative courts were not created because of this, firstly, at the time, was not in ¬ must, secondly, the level of the legal system in the country did not meet those requirements, which can operate Administrative Court;

- In 1918 the People's Commissariat of deregulation drafted creating ¬ ing administrative court in a special Committee on the devel ¬ revision of complaints with state control, as well as local offices of the Committee;

- In 1921, the Institute of Soviet law at Moscow State University and in 1922 NKYU USSR developed projects creation of administrative justice;

- In in 1917-1920 (the period of the independent Ukrainian state) in the Constitution of the Ukrainian People's Republic in 1918 was predicted: "The judiciary in civil, criminal and administrative law administered exclusively by the judicial authorities." In complementary articles number 103 indicated that the highest Der ¬ wide the court consists of all members of the highest Cassation and the Administrative Courts and their judges. Thus Administrative Court recognized part of the judiciary to consider and decide on the legality of orders of administrative bodies and authorities. The above acts expired after the entry of the Soviet Union;

- October 12, 1927 adopted the Administrative Code of Ukraine ¬ tion of PCP, which had no analogues in the USSR and the predicted order of devel ¬ revision of complaints against local administrative bodies. In the court complaint were considered only in the following cases: no ¬ right of the description of the property, to be sold in case of necessary payments, incorrect separation from the sale of property assets [9J;

-1924 - Early 1960 pp. - The transition from court to extrajudicial against illegal actions by administrative bodies, ie legality in public administration provided by the state, departmental and public control. The courts considered only some disputes of administrative and legal issues (complaints against notaries, bailiffs);

- 1961 - early 1970 pp. - A gradual expansion ¬ Rennie limits of judicial control over the activities of pack ¬ ment (Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR from December 15, 1961 "On further limit the use of fines imposed administratively" gave citizens the right to appeal to the general courts decision the imposition of fines; Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet from 12 April 1968 "On the procedure for reviewing proposals, applications and complaints" predicted administrative pro ¬ tsesualni warranty complaints and applications);

- In April 1978 adopted the Constitution of the USSR, p. 56 of which in ¬ fastened that "the actions of officials, committed in violation of the law, and above the powers and infringe the rights of citizens, mo ¬ zhut be prescribed by law challenged in court";

- In June 1987 adopted by the USSR Law "On the Oscar ¬ tion in court misconduct of officials that infringe the rights of citizens", which was an important step towards the establishment of administrative justice in Ukraine and led to amendments of the Civil Code of the USSR Chapter 31-A " Complaints of citizens on the actions or inaction of state authorities, legal or officials in the field of management. " Law of the USSR on November 2, 1989 "On the procedure for appeal to the court misconduct of government and officials that infringe the rights of citizens", adopted to replace the previous, but characterized by essential ¬ defined, which was the ability to appeal decisions and activities as a sole and collegial government and officials;

- In 1996, the concept of judicial reform has declared the creation of administrative courts;

- In 1998, the concept of administrative reform in Ukraine has substantiated the role of administrative justice as a form of legal con ¬ trol over the activities of the government;

- 2002 - the formation of the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine

-2004, The - currently - the formation of local courts in Ukraine (according to the Decree of the President of Ukraine "On the establishment of local and appellate administrative court approval of their network and quantitative composition");

- 2005 - the creation of legal and procedural basis ARRANGEMENTS activ ¬ administrative courts, July 6, 2005 the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine, which entered into force on September 1, 2005

.....

3. Concept and features of Admin. process.

According to Art. 3 CAA Admin. Justice - activity Admin. courts to hear and resolve Admin. cases in the manner prescribed by the CAA.

ADMIN. proceedings aimed at protecting the rights, freedoms and interests of persons in public law relations from violations by the subjects of authority (authorities, local governments, their officials and other subjects in the exercise of the power management functions based on legislation, including delegated powers).

Although the terms "Admin. Justice" and "Admin. Process" can be used as synonyms in the CAA (items 4 - 5 annotated article) they separated.

ADMIN. Justice - an activity Admin. Court to hear and resolve Admin. Affairs and Admin. process - a relationship that made during Admin. proceedings. The term "Admin. Process" is often used in the Code in the phrase "members Admin. Process."

In Soviet science Soviet and post-Soviet period category "Admin. Process" mainly seen in the broader sense. By Admin. process in a broad sense to include various government activities for consideration and resolution of specific cases that arise in the field of management. Often the structure Admin. process include the procedure for adoption of the "management regulations." The Code adopted the concept of a narrow understanding of Admin. process as one of the categories of justice in the Admin. affairs.

Signs Admin. proceedings are:

1) Admin. Justice is a form of Admin. rights as material;

2) aimed at regulating public legal relations;

3) one of the actors has always advocated the subject of authority;

4) the availability of public interest;

5) There is specific only his inherent, discretionary method imperatively with certain characteristics;

6) its norms established parliament, which is the supreme legislative body;

7) it is in the laws of Ukraine and international regulations.

4. Principles Admin.protsesu.

Clarifying the essence Admin. process contributes significantly to the analysis of its principles, basic, fundamental ideas by which exercise Admin.-judicial process.

 Article 7. Principles of Administrative Procedure

     1. Principles of justice in administrative courts are:

     1) rule of law;

     2) legality;

     3) equality of all members of the administrative process before the law and the courts;

     4) adversarial, optionality and official clarification of all the circumstances of the case;

     5) transparency and openness of the administrative process;

     6) of appeal and cassation appeal against decisions of the administrative court, except in cases prescribed by this Code; {Paragraph 6 of Article 7 as amended by the Law N 2453-VI (2453-17) from 07.07.2010}

     7) binding judgments.

The principle of legality is the most important principle Admin. process is characterized as a regime under social relations that arise in this area, the laws and regulations of the state, the atmosphere of interaction between countries and people.

Implementation of the principle of legality in Admin. Procedure field based on a number of conditions, which include the unity of law, rule of law, guarantee the rights and freedoms of inadmissibility opposed the legality and appropriateness of the inevitability of punishment for breaking the law.

The principle of legal equality is based on the constitutional provisions of equality of citizens before the law. According to Art. 24 KU citizens have equal rights and freedoms and are equal before the law. There can be no privileges or restrictions based on race, color, political, religious or other beliefs, sex, ethnic and social origin, property status, place of residence, linguistic or other characteristics. The above fully applies to other entities Admin. process, ie the requirement of the law is equally applicable to all, without exception, government agencies and officials engaged Admin.-judicial process. His concrete embodiment of the principle of legal equality is in shaping the legal status of subjects Admin. process.

The principle of protection of interests of individuals and the state. The most important task of government is the protection of the constitutional system of our country, the established order of government, public and social order. This task is implemented in order to protect the interests of the state, but at the same time in a democratic, law-based society to ensure the protection of state interests serves as the basis observance of interests of all law-abiding members of society. Therefore, ensuring the protection of state interests are closely connected with the provision of interests of the individual citizens of the state in general and in particular. Here available feedback. Protection of interests of a person, a citizen - a key factor in the stability of civil society and, therefore, the proper functioning of the state apparatus and the state in general.

The principle of formality Admin. process expressed in securing the obligation of public authorities and their officials to carry out the review and resolution of individual-specific cases and related actions (gathering the necessary materials and evidence) on behalf of the state and mostly at public expense.

The principle objective truth aimed at the complete exclusion from the process of manifestation of subjectivity, unilateralism in analyzing the actions of the subjects of the process, to ensure the establishment and evaluation of the facts that are important to make an informed decision in a particular case Admin.y. It is no accident, for example, the legislator as a major problem in the case of Admin. violation affirmed the need for timely, comprehensive, full and objective clarification of the circumstances of each case, solving it exactly according to the legislation. With such a need assessment study legislator associates at trial evidence.

The principle of transparency. The implementation of this principle by the need broad public awareness about the activities of state bodies and their officials to implement Admin.-judicial functions. Along with the right of citizens to obtain information about the activities of the state, enshrined in Art. 43 Law "On information" on October 2, 1992, the legislators directly obliges the relevant authorities inform citizens about their decisions. Thus, p. 14 Law "On Public Associations" indicates the need for a legal body to report officially recognized associations of citizens in the media. Some government regulations almost entirely devoted to informing the public.

The principle of the implementation process of the national language and ensure the right to use their language reflects an important aspect of all state bodies and their officials - respect the national dignity of all citizens of Ukraine. Consideration of specific cases are state language of Ukraine, but a citizen who does not speak Ukrainian, can participate in the process, using their native language. Thus he fully ensure receipt of all necessary information and the opportunity to share their information to the authority or official that examines specific Admin. case. To this end, in the process of such procedural shape as a translator.

The principle of the presumption of innocence and the legality of actions of citizens. Adherence to this principle should serve as the basic prerequisite for the progress and results of the jurisdictional Admin. process. The main features of the presumption of innocence of citizens lies in the fact that they reflect the objective legal position that expresses the opinion of the state regarding the guilt of the person or the legality of its actions, not according to the specific business process. The proof of innocence or the right person action is its right and not an obligation. A person considered innocent of committing Admin. offense or actions considered legitimate until guilt or wrongfulness of her actions can be demonstrated as prescribed by law, and the resolution or decision in a particular case should be based on assumptions.

The principle of the speed and efficiency of the process due promptness executive and management activities of state bodies. Determination of specific, relatively short period of consideration and decision Admin.yi case is a factor that, on the one hand, eliminates delay, and the other - to streamline the movement of cases enter the process in a defined timeframe. Compared to the criminal and civil processes most of Admin. Interior view of the material is less burdensome for the state. However, this does not mean that some financial costs and organizational challenges have become an obstacle to the proper conduct of the process, protect the rights and legitimate interests of citizens.

The principle of autonomy in decision primarily excludes any interference by other authorities and officials in Admin.-judicial process entities authorized to conduct the process. On the other hand, it allows a greater responsibility for the decision, contributes to their legality. Strictly implement this principle does not allow body or official duties shift to solve cases within their jurisdiction, on the other, including the lower court.

It should be noted that the implementation of these principles Admin. process becomes possible by using specially established for the procedural means. They are actively characterization Admin.-procedural activity form its organizational framework and act as a kind of procedural.

.