The significance of law enforcement cannot be understated in any state, and diverse models and traditions of law enforcement have evolved within different legal sustems. The status of the Procuracy in the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union and modern Russia, has been consistently characterized by its own independent power for supervising legality, including the actions of government officials. This contrasts with the European and Anglo-American legal systems where the concept of “general supervision” is not present and prosecutors do not possess equivalent powers. In the socialist model of China, an independent system of supervisory bodies has been established separately from the procurator’s office to oversee the activities of government officials. Each model exhibits distinct ontological, structural and organizational features, and a comparative analysis of their accumulated experiences facilitates the identification of their respective advantages and disadvantages, underscoring the relevance of this study. The research aimes to identify and analyze the commonalities and differences among four organizational models for ensuring the rule of law. Notably, the empirical basis for comparing supervisory authorities emphasises the state superiority function, irrespective of the body responsible for its execution (functional approach), rather than external similarities such as the name "prosecutor's office" or "prosecutor". The study draws from authentic legal texts, regulations, authoritative doctrinal commentaries, relevant judicial practices, and official interpretations of foreign legislation. The outcomes of the research lead to informed conclusions regarding the distinctiveness of the Russian model of the Procuracy, which incorporates several advantages from each foreign model, complements them with its own features and is thus capable of embracing positive experiences, regardless of their origins, to effectively filfill its mission.