This article examines the key aspects of evidence in administrative cases related to challenging decisions, actions and omissions of public administration bodies in the provision of administrative services in courts of general jurisdiction. The author highlights the characteristic features and specific requirements imposed on the procedural parties in such cases, as well as analyzes the factors influencing the proof process. Paying attention to legislative norms and practical examples, the article emphasizes the importance of collecting evidence, the possibility of their presentation and evaluation in court. The problems faced by citizens and organizations when appealing against the actions of public authorities are considered, and ways to solve them are proposed. Attention is focused on the need to protect the rights and legitimate interests of plaintiffs, while ensuring a balanced and objective consideration of cases. The article summarizes the existing judicial practice and makes recommendations on optimizing evidence in administrative processes, thereby contributing to the improvement of the administrative justice system. A comprehensive analysis of the key elements influencing the formation of a reliable evidence base for the category of cases under consideration is carried out. Particular attention is paid to judicial practice reflecting different approaches to evaluating the evidence presented, as well as their importance for ensuring a fair and reasonable trial. The study focuses on the practical aspects of interaction between the parties, including means of protecting the rights of citizens, as well as on the possibilities of legal analysis that can improve the overall effectiveness of the judicial process. The specific problems that arise when challenging the inaction of state bodies are considered, which emphasizes the relevance of the study and the need to continue scientific research in this area. The work is aimed at a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of legal protection in the framework of administrative proceedings and the development of recommendations for improving current legislation. This should make legal procedures more accessible and understandable for citizens, thereby contributing to improving their human rights opportunities and increasing confidence in public authorities. In conclusion, the importance of further research on this topic is emphasized in order to achieve a balance of interests of both citizens and state structures in the process of administrative proceedings.
administrative dispute, judicial practice, CAS of the Russian Federation, administrative plaintiff, defendant, court, improvement of legislation.
1. Konstituciya RF // Rossiyskaya gazeta. – 1993. – № 237.
2. KAS RF ot 08.03.2015 g. N 21-FZ // SZ RF. – 2015. – № 10. – St. 1391.
3. Postanovlenie Plenuma VS RF ot 13.06.2017 № 21 «O primenenii sudami mer processual'nogo prinuzhdeniya pri rassmotrenii administrativnyh del» // Rossiyskaya gazeta. – 2017. – № 132.
4. Postanovlenie Plenuma VS RF ot 27.09.2016 № 36 «O nekotoryh voprosah primeneniya sudami KAS RF» // Rossiyskaya gazeta. – 2016. – № 222.
5. Goldobina S.Yu. Osobennosti dokazyvaniya po delam ob osparivanii resheniy, deystviy (bezdeystviya) dolzhnostnyh lic, organov vlasti i upravleniya. 2019. №9-2 (96). S. 83–85.
6. Golichenko M. M. Vliyanie pravovoy politiki gosudarstva na dokazyvanie v grazhdanskom processe // Pravovaya politika i pravovaya zhizn'. 2006. № 1. S. 38–47.
7. Grubcova S. P. Mesto norm o dokazatel'stvah v sudebnom administrativnom processual'nom prave RF // Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy process. 2017. № 6. S. 37–41.
8. Mahina S. N. Teoriya dokazyvaniya i dokazatel'stv v administrativnom sudoproizvodstve: stanovlenie i razvitie // Administrativnoe pravo i process. 2016. № 2. – S. 4–9.
9. Pacaciya M. Sh. Princip processual'noy aktivnosti suda ili princip sudebnogo rukovodstva processom? // Zakon. 2016. № 1. S. 63–67.
10. Ryazanovskiy V. A. Edinstvo processa // Administrativnaya yusticiya: konec XIX – nachalo XX veka : hrestomatiya. Ch. 2. – 218 s.
11. Saakyan, E. G. Osobennosti administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva po delam osparivaniya deystviy (bezdeystviya) organov publichnoy vlasti // Molodoy uchenyy. – 2020. – № 46 (336). S. 323-325 .
