Abstract

Introduction: the paper analyzes current Russian legislation regulating the functioning of the institute of state service. Aim: to study federal legislative acts containing provisions that define the list of state bodies that are classified as law enforcement agencies, and to look into the reasons why the legislator abandons the term “law enforcement service”. Methods: general scientific and special methods, including comparative legal, comprehensive, logical methods, analysis and synthesis. Results: we reveal certain inconsistencies in the regulatory framework that make it difficult to establish common features and specifics of administrative and legal status of such bodies; these inconsistencies also impede further development of the theory of administrative law when studying the institution of state service. Conclusion: based on the analysis of the types of functional activities of state bodies, we conclude that the service in the prosecutor’s office is classified as the state service related to law enforcement activity; we note its similarity and difference in relation to the service in other state bodies that perform law enforcement functions, including institutions and bodies of the penal system. In line with the methodology of integrative legal understanding, we define the service in the prosecutor’s office as the professional activity carried out on behalf of the state by employees holding positions in authorized federal state bodies and empowered by law to apply state enforcement measures aimed at protecting law and order, human rights and freedoms, public and state interests, combating crimes and other offenses, or the professional activity related to the performance of the functions of internal administration and staffing of these bodies. We emphasize that such service is implemented in strict accordance with the rules established by administrative and legal norms, and on the basis of ethical principles and moral principles that form the orientation of employees toward achieving socially useful goals and interests of the state itself. Scientific and practical significance of the article lies in the fact that the conclusions made in it can be used in scientific, educational and law-making activities. Keywords: state service; law enforcement agencies; law enforcement activities; control and supervisory activities; human rights activities; prosecutor’s office agencies; prosecutor’s office employees.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call