Rusakov Alexey Nikolaevich

The imperfection of the legal regulation of the institution of proof in proceedings on administrative offenses poses a challenge for the law enforcement officer to choose the legal act to be applied in order to overcome the gap. The article substantiates the need to apply the Civil Procedure Code by analogy, which is predetermined by the similarity of the applicable standard of proof, the common goals and objectives of civil proceedings and proceedings on administrative offenses. The article also highlights the similarity of the standards used to refute evidentiary presumptions. At the same time, the application of criminal procedure law by analogy in the process of proving administrative offenses does not correspond to the public danger of the relevant offenses and unreasonably increases the standard of proof for administrative jurisdiction bodies. The inadmissibility of applying the Criminal Procedure Code by analogy in the proof of administrative offences is also predetermined by the shorter period of administrative liability compared to the period of limitation in criminal law. Based on the analysis of certain court decisions and clarifications from higher courts, it can be stated that the application of the analogy of civil procedural law in the process of bringing a person to administrative liability is fundamentally permissible. Due to the asymmetry in the possibilities of proving, the article substantiates the need to apply Part 1 of Article 57 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation by analogy of law, namely, to impose on the court the obligation to assist in collecting evidence for the person involved, in the event of the submission of relevant requests for the production of evidence or the appointment of a forensic examination. The article also supports the view of scholars who advocate the unification of the two proceedings discussed above

analogy of the law, proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, similar legal relations, evidence, bodies of administrative jurisdiction, civil proceedings, criminal proceedings

Rusakov Alexey Nikolaevich – Postgraduate Student, Law Institute, Kemerovo State University (6, Krasnaya st., Kemerovo, 650000, Russian Federation); ORCID: 0009-0007-9897-8400, RSCI Author ID: 1223204, e-mail: aleksey-rusakov@bk.ru

Rusakov A.N. Primenenie analogii zakona v dokazyvanii po delam ob administrativnykh pravonarusheniyakh [Application of Legal Analogy in Proofing in Cases of Administrative Offenses] Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald]. 2026, no 2 (113), pp. 38–44. – DOI 10.26516/2071-8136.2026.2.38 (in Russian).

342.9

1. Bychkov A.I. Pravila povedeniya i standarty dokazyvaniya v arbitrazhnom protsesse [Rules of conduct and standards of proof in arbitration proceedings]. Moscow, Infotropic Media Publ., 2024, 108 p. (in Russian)

2. Vlasenko N.A. Ob analogii v sovremennom protsessualnom prave [On analogy in modern procedural law]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya [Russian Justice], 2005, no. 7, pp. 32-36. (in Russian)

3. Germanov A.V. Analogiya zakona v grazhdanskom protsessualnom prave [Analogy of law in civil procedural law]. Cand. sci. diss. abstr. Saratov, 2019, 25 p. (in Russian)

4. Zatolokin A.A. O sootnoshenii norm administrativno-protsessualnogo i ugolovno-protsessualnogo prava [On the correlation of norms of administrative procedural and criminal procedural law]. Obshchestvo i pravo [Society and Law], 2020, no. 2 (72), pp. 105-108. (in Russian)

5. Karapetov A.G., Kosarev A.S. Standarty dokazyvaniya: analiticheskoye i empiricheskoye issledovaniye [Standards of proof: analytical and empirical research]. Vestnik ekonomicheskogo pravosudiya RF. Prilogenie [Herald of Economic Justice of the Russian Federation. Supplement], 2019, no. 5, pp. 3-96. (in Russian)

6. Lazarev V.V. Probely v prave i puti ikh ustraneniya [Gaps in law and ways to eliminate them]. Moscow, Yuridicheskaya literatura Publ., 1974, 153 p. (in Russian)

7. Lushnikov P.V. Probely v prave i sposoby ikh vospolneniya [Gaps in law and ways to fill them]. Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika i pravo [Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series Economics and Law], 2020, no. 3, pp. 396-405. (in Russian)

8. Novikov A.V. Sootnosheniya zakonodatelstv ob administrativnom sudoproizvodstve i ob administrativnykh pravonarusheniyakh [Correlation of legislation on administrative proceedings and on administrative offenses]. Zhurnal administrativnogo sudoproizvodstva [Journal of Administrative Proceedings], 2021, no. 4, pp. 17-27. (in Russian)

9. Simonenko A.V. Ugolovnyy protsess i administrativno-yurisdiktsionnyy protsess: skhozhest yuridicheskikh konstruktsiy [Criminal procedure and administrative-jurisdictional procedure: similarity of legal constructs]. Vestnik VI MVD Rossii [Bulletin of the VI Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia], 2007, no. 3, pp. 1-4. (in Russian)

10. Spektor E.I. Problemy v zakonodatelstve i puti ikh preodoleniya [Problems in legislation and ways to overcome them]. Cand. sci. diss. Moscow, 2003, 127 p. (in Russian)

11. Trezubov E.S. Dinamika standartov dokazyvaniya v tsivilisticheskom protsesse [Dynamics of standards of proof in civil procedure]. Pravoprimeneniye v publichnom i chastnom prave [Law enforcement in public and private law]. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, Omsk, March 24, 2023. Omsk, Omsk St. Univ. named after F.M. Dostoevsky Publ., 2023, pp. 397-402. (in Russian)