Digitalization of control and supervision activities: Russian and French experience

The subject of the article is legal regulation at the transition stage from e-government to digital government in Russia and France.
The purpose of the article is confirmation or confutation of the hypothesis that in the practice of digital interaction between administrative bodies and individuals, there are problems that must be clearly identified and can be solved using the French experience of legal regulation of the digitalization of public administration.
The methodology of the study includes comparative analysis, description as well as particular academic legal methods (interpretation of legal acts, judicial acts and state programs of digitalization in Russia and France, formal legal method).
The main results and scope of their application. Russia and France are similar because of not only belonging to the continental legal system, but also existing in the transition stage from e-government to digital. Public administration and law in both countries have to cope with the challenges of digitalization. In this regard, the experience of implementing reforms in France, which is known for its administrative and legal traditions and successes, is of particular interest to the Russian Federation. The legal support of public administration digitalization is clearly lagging behind the rapid development of digital technologies; moreover, new information solutions are significantly ahead of their legal implementation. A comparative analysis between the strategic plans of public administration, relating to digitalization of control and supervision activities in the Russian federation, and the e-government's present and future legislative framework, indicates a lack of coherence between the plans and their legislative counterparts. The initial implementation of public administration digitalization strategic plan through legislation on services is generally supported in the “Digital Public Administration” federal project through the legislation of services. At the same time, the draft of the new Federal law on state control (supervision) and municipal control in Russia offers its own information infrastructure for control and supervisory activities.

Conclusions. In order to overcome the fragmentation in the regulation of electronic interaction between private entities and public administration, the French experience of regulating the general principles of administrative procedures and guarantees of good public administration in a single act is very useful. Such an approach would also ensure compliance with the basic principles of proportionality and the prohibition of excessive formalism in the meaningful differentiation of errors and violations committed in the course of electronic communication. In addition according to French experience, it is necessary to maintain alternative ways of communication with administrative authorities including electronic ones, and consider any legislative exceptions. Also, it is necessary to define additional guarantees to citizens during interactions with technical support services; defining standards for the legal qualification of technical failures, pre-trial and judicial appeal mechanisms against automatically made decisions.

1. Savignac J.-Ch. Les administrations de la France. Paris, Masson, 1995. 352 p. (In French).

2. Costa D. L'influence du droit européen sur la procédure administrative française. L'Actualité juridique. Droit administratif, 2002, no. 22, pp. 1394–1399. (In French).

3. Ferrari P. Les droits des citoyens dans leurs relations avec les administrations: commentaire général de la loi n° 2000-321 du 12 avril 2000. L'Actualité juridique. Droit administratif, 2000, no. 6, pp. 471–485. (In French).

4. Nozdrachev A. F. Administrative acts: concept, signs, dynamics, in: Khabrieva T. Ya, Marku Zh. (ed.). Administrative procedures and control in the light of the European experience. Moscow, Statut Publ., 2011. P. 134–164. (In Russ.).

5. Vedel G. Administrative law of France. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1973. 511 p. (In Russ.).

6. Waline J. Droit administratif. Paris, Dalloz, 2008. 382 p. (In French).

7. Guglielmi G.-J., Koubi G. Droit de service public. Paris, Montchrestien, 2000. 896 p. (In French).

8. Kuryndin P. A. Implementation of the basic principles of law in the framework of pre-trial appeal of administrative acts in France: problems of perception of the French experience in Russia. Akademicheskij yuridicheskij zhurnal=Academic law journal from Irkutsk, 2017, no. 3, pp. 46–60. (In Russ.).

9. Melekhin A.V. Administrative law of the Russian Federation: a course of lectures. Moscow, Consultant Plus Publ., 2009. 617 p. (In Russ.).

10. Popov L.L., Migachev Yu.I. Administrative law of the Russian Federation. Moscow, RG-Press, 2019. 544 p. (In Russ.).

11. Starilov Yu. N. From the long-term discussion to the adoption of the Federal law "On administrative procedures". Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: Seriya «Pravo» = Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series "Law", 2017, no. 4, pp. 8–21. (In Russ.).

12. Talapina E. V. Theory of administrative acts: to the draft law on public administration. Zakony Rossii. Opyt. Analiz. Praktika, 2016, no. 9, pp. 84–89. (In Russ.).

13. Dobrolyubova E.I., Yuzhakov V.N., Efremov A.A. et al. Digital future state of performance management. Moscow, Delo Publ., RANEPA Publ., 2019. 114 p. (In Russ.).

14. Pavlyutenkova M.Yu. Electronic government vs digital government in the context of digital transformation. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i social'nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 2019, no. 5. pp. 120–135. (In Russ.).

15. Talapina E. V. Legal regulation of digital government in Russia: opportunities to meet the requirements of the OECD. Gosudarstvennaya vlast' i mestnoe samoupravlenie = State power and local self-government, 2018, no. 3, pp. 20–25. (In Russ.).

16. Algan Y., Bacache-Beauvallet M., Perrot A. Administration numérique. Notes du conseil d’analyse économique, 2016, no. 7, pp. 1–12. (In French).

17. Conseil d'Etat. Puissance publique et plateformes numériques: accompagner l'"ubérisation": étude annuelle 2017. Paris, La Documentation française, 2017. 249 p. (In French).

18. Vaypan V.A. Legal regulation of the digital economy. Predprinimatel'skoe pravo. Prilozhenie “Pravo i Biznes” = Entrepreneurial law. Law and Business, 2018, no. 1, pp. 12–17. (In Russ.).

19. Bobrova N.A. Digitization: pros and cons. Konstitutsionnoe i municipal'noe pravo = Constitutional and municipal law, 2019, no. 10, pp. 23–25. (In Russ.).

20. Dobrolyubova E. I., Yuzhakov V. N. Evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of control and supervisory activities. Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i municipal'nogo upravleniya = Public administration issues, 2015, no. 4, pp. 41–64. (In Russ.).