КОНСТИТУЦІЙНО-ПРАВОВІ ЗАСАДИ АДМІНІСТРАТИВНОГО ДОГОВОРУ

Abstract

The article traces theoretically the legal bases of an administrative contract as a means of regulating administrative legal relations, which is not sufficiently regulated by the Constitution of Ukraine. The legal nature of the fixing of the administrative contract in its current form in the Constitution has been established. At the same time, there was a controversy against the possible counter-argumentation, namely the lack of regulation at the constitutional level of other types of treaties governed by sectoral legislation. In parallel, the analysis of individual works in which, according to the author, administrative contracts mistakenly refer to economic-legal contracts in which there is a public-legal element, such as contracts for transfer to the business entity of budgetary compensation for the use of services on a preferential basis or contracts on the provision of services to public authorities to ensure that they exercise their functions. It is argued that in this form an administrative contract cannot be a constitutional-legal institute. Instead, if we really consider an administrative contract as a legal institution that regulates on the basis of harmonization of relations between public administration and the implementation of state-administrative functions, it must find its binding direct binding in the Constitution of Ukraine. The prerequisites for this exist in the form of a contractual order, envisaged by the Constitution, of pooling the funds of territorial communities, local self-government bodies for the purpose of implementing joint projects. Amendments to the relevant constitutional wording are proposed, providing for activities solely on the basis and in the manner provided by the laws of Ukraine. It is concluded that the administrative contract is a special form of realization of public interest, which, in the author's opinion, excludes mutual economic obligations of the parties and comes in the form of a legal act of normative or individual nature, the right of conclusion and execution of which should be clearly defined by the Constitution.