The article describes the concept, features and types of administrative coercion. It is stated that state coercion, which is embodied in specific methods of influence, is heterogeneous. Legal coercion is manifested, first of all, in various forms of liability: criminal, administrative, disciplinary and property liability which is borne by citizens, officials and legal entities which have committed an offence, and also in the application by authorized state bodies and officials of other coercive measures against persons who do not voluntarily comply with the requirements of legal provisions. It is noted that the use of administrative coercion is not only an important area of administrative law enforcement activity of the relevant state bodies, but also a key criterion for the exercise of the law enforcement function of the State as a whole. The author emphasizes that unlike other measures of state coercion which are always a reaction to unlawful acts of subjects, administrative coercion measures are often used for preventive impact and prevention of offences, as well as for establishing law and order in various emergency circumstances. The author proposes to define administrative coercion as the application by law enforcement agencies authorized by the State to objects which are not under their control, regardless of the will and desire of the latter, and regulated by administrative law, of moral, property, personal and other measures of influence with the aim of protecting public relations arising in the field of public administration, by preventing and suppressing offences, and also by bringing perpetrators to justice for their commission. It is noted that the external forms of administrative coercion are its measures. It is emphasized that in the doctrinal sense, measures of administrative coercion should be divided into three groups: administrative preventive measures, measures of administrative termination, and measures of administrative penalty. The author emphasizes that the martial law regime in Ukraine has made significant adjustments to the functioning of almost all state bodies, institutions and organizations, and they have particularly affected the activities of law enforcement agencies, including the application of administrative coercion measures.
Read full abstract