In conditions of modern state-building and law-making caused by significant changes in positive law, arises the necessity of developing a new understanding of the doctrine of administrative law. This understanding should be based on the methodological pluralism, present the doctrine as a complex, multidimensional system phenomenon that denotes a set of legal scientific judgments about administrative legal framework. The above outlines the purpose of this study. The main method of scientific work is the method of legal analysis, the use of which allowed, in the context of a holistic presentation of knowledge about the doctrine of administrative law, to determine its concept, structure, system by analysing the consequences of: a) the philosophy of law, b) the theory of law, c) the history of law; d) the administrative law. The focus is on the methodological significance of philosophical, theoretical positions, connections with the general legal doctrine in the mutual perception of research achievements; delimitation of administrative law with other branches; ensuring the consideration of administrative legislation in the statutory material of other branches of law (and vice versa); identification of the identity or differences in the genesis of legal phenomena, etc. It is proved that the phenomenon "doctrine of administrative law" constitutes a system described by: 1. Unity in relation to the environment (integrity) and diversity of relations with it; 2. Its structure, the presence of relatively independent components in its system; 3. The presence of determinant features of "doctrine" as an entity, which constitute the result of the interaction of its components; 4. The presence of contradictions within the system that are the driving force of self-development of the system; 5. Historicity, the presence of over-time development, the "historical basis" and the experience of the past. The definition of the doctrine of administrative law is offered. The practical significance of the research results is that the theoretical provisions and conclusions can form the basis for further research on the doctrine of administrative law and its issues

The object is public relations that are directly related to the settlement of the principles of "external" activity of public servants. The subject is the anti-corruption standards of legal regulation of "external" activities of public officials. Research methodology is shaped by both general scientific and special methods of scientific research. The basic is dialectical analysis, semantic, comparative-legal, logical-legal, modeling, forecasting are also used. The following conclusion can be made. Anti-corruption standardization of legal regulation of "external" activities of public servants helps to systematize, unify the principles of such regulation, and increase the efficiency of enforcement. It is advisable: a) awareness of the importance of "external" activities of public servants for the latter (their personal growth, personal realization), and for the public service as a whole (including the formation and improvement of the quality of human resources), consolidation of official norms-definition of the "external activity of public servants" as any activity of the latter out of office regardless of place, time, form, payment; b) introduction of a "mixed" model of legal regulation of "external" activity of public servants, with a combination of prohibition (business in all manifestations) and restrictions (with clear definition of criteria); c) unification of the principles of regulation of "external" activity of public employees and their concentration in the "basic" anti-corruption legislative act, alignment with the provisions of the legislation on public service; d) harmonization of the provisions on "external" activities of public servants with the legislation on declaring the income received from any sources outside the place of public service; e) to introduce the notification of the direct supervisor at the place of public service about "external" activity; f) the introduction of relevant, unlawful acts committed in connection with violations of the law on "external" activity by public officials, sanctions (penal or personal property).

Аналіз сучасних поглядів на правову природу адміністративного судочинства виявив наявність наукової проблеми щодо його ідентифікації у правовій системі і системі права України, розв’язання якої має стимулювати подальше осягнення змістовних характеристик судового оскарження дій та бездіяльності суб’єктів владних повноважень. Метою статті є встановлення співвідношення адміністративного судочинства з предметом адміністративного права й адміністративним процесом та оновлення розуміння поняття “адміністративний процес”. Для її досягнення досліджені погляди вчених-адміністративістів на розуміння і кореляцію понять “адміністративне судочинство”, “предмет адміністративного права”, “адміністративний процес”; норми Кодексу адміністративного судочинства України; положення інших нормативних документів. Наголошено на тому, що функціонування окремої судової адміністративної юрисдикції забезпечено Законом України “Про ратифікацію Конвенції про захист прав людини і основоположних свобод 1950 року, Першого протоколу та протоколів № 2, 4, 7 та 11 до Конвенції”, а процес оновлення українського адміністративного права і створення його сучасної парадигми пов’язується з впровадженням в адміністративний простір Концепції адміністративної реформи в Україні. Висвітлено зміст наукового супроводження реформ адміністративно-правових інститутів, який полягає у: а) встановлені закономірностей реформування; б) забезпеченні політико-філософських висновків правовим обґрунтуванням; в) генеруванні законодавчих і організаційних ініціатив; г) правовій експертизі здійснюваних заходів; ґ) власній рефлексії та еволюції. Наведено аргументи, що доводять обґрунтованість визнання адміністративного судочинства, по-перше, системоутворюючим компонентом предмета адміністративного права, по-друге, невід’ємною складовою адміністративного процесу. У результаті зроблено висновок про те, що адміністративне судочинство має адміністративно-правову природу і є складовою предмета адміністративного права й адміністративного процесу. Запропоновано визначати адміністративний процес як узагальнену назву нормативно регламентованої діяльності публічної адміністрації щодо реалізації владних повноважень.

No abstract

The search for an optimal model for relationships between individuals and entities of public administration should go hand in hand with the statutorization of the guarantees of individual rights, freedoms and legal interests, including the principle of protection of legitimate expectations of individuals in their relations with public administration entities. The research provides grounds for believing that anti-corruption restrictions for entities of public administration are the components of the above-mentioned principle since they act as a manifestation of the binding force for the latter, emphasizing anthropocentric nature of their activity. It is the standardization of models for resource utilization in regard to the activities of public administration entities with the use of anti-corruption restrictions that makes the trust of an individual to public entities possible. It also makes the actions and decisions of the latter predictable, let alone enables unification of interpretation and application of national and international legislation. Using the resource of anti-corruption restrictions, which is aimed to make it impossible for public administration entities to get distracted from their main task of protecting and realizing individuals’ legitimate expectations, a sound doctrinal analysis of the phenomena is advisable for establishing the new and consistent with the latest advances in the legal science basis for rule-making and legal enforcement in the sphere of relations between individuals and entities of public administration. Owing to the statutorization of the use of relevant anti-corruption restrictions as well as compliance with technicalities and proper response to modern challenges, the conclusion is made about a great potential for quality assurance of the anti-corruption law with its availability, intelligibility for all legal entities in the sphere of public administration, unification of its use and interpretation and hence the predictability of the decisions and actions of public administration entities, guarantee of realization and protection of the legitimate expectations of individuals in their relations with the latter.