According to Art. 118 of the Constitution, justice in Russia is implemented only court of law. Articles 120-122 of the Basic Law enshrine the fundamental criteria for this activity. They established guarantees of the inviolability and independence of judges. Officials are subordinate exclusively to the Constitution and the Federal Law. The Basic Law also establishes the irremovability of judges. 
Legal status of officials
Of all the aspects of the formation and functioning of the judicial system, the most important is independence. The effectiveness of the functioning of this branch of power depends on its implementation. The independence of judges implies the absence of outside influence on an authorized person in the course of his activities. This principle of subordination exclusively to the law, of course, is determining for the formation of the status of authorities in a modern state. It is he who ensures the existence of the Constitution and the implementation of the concept of the rule of law.
Social value status
Subordination exclusively to the Law is universal and is not limited to the framework of one state system. The social significance of the status is so great that this guarantee of protecting the freedoms and interests of citizens was the subject of discussion at the UN. In 1985, December 13, the General Assembly adopted a special document. It established the main criteria for the independence of the judiciary. This document linked inextricably the institutional and organizational independence of institutions and individual officials with respect to other public and state bodies. This is expressed in the isolation and self-government of the judicial system, as well as in the prohibition of other institutions of power to administer justice or interfere in it. Only in this way is impartiality ensured when the authorities exercise their powers.
Judicial immunity principle: controversial issue
Not every post has such a high status. The term of office of a judge is unlimited. To occupy this position, a citizen undergoes a fairly rigorous selection process. Only the Attorney General can initiate a criminal case against a judge. Moreover, his initiative must be approved by a qualified board. More recently, this decision was considered final and could not be appealed. However, this raised objections among lawyers.
In competent circles, the question arose of why the immunity of a judge is considered contrary to the constitutional provision on the equality of citizens before the law. So, some of them said that the initiation of criminal proceedings should not depend on the decision of a qualified board. Others stated that any official status of a person cannot be an obstacle to opening a case or become the basis for relieving him of responsibility for illegal actions. With these objections, lawyers pointed out the need to observe the principle of equality of citizens before the court and the law as one of the fundamental aspects of law. 
What does “immunity of judges” mean?
In the Russian Federation, such "immunity" acts as a specific exception to the constitutional provision on the equality of citizens before the law. In its content, the irremovability and inviolability of judges goes beyond the individual rights of a citizen. This is due to the fact that the state and society impose increased requirements on the official and his activities. This, in turn, implies additional guarantees of the integrity of judges.In other words, the provisions establishing this one of the most important elements determining the legal status of officials are focused on ensuring the foundations of the separation of powers and the constitutional system, as well as the independence and subordination of the entire system to the Law.
Practical implementation
The immunity of judges is not a privilege of officials. It acts as a means of protecting their professional activities in pursuance of constitutional provisions. In accordance with the data of the Higher Qualification Judicial Collegium, its regional units as a whole correctly apply the institution of immunity and more often agree with the ideas submitted by the Prosecutor General. Moreover, the latter as professionally and objectively as possible approaches the issue regarding the entry of officials into the collegium, consent to initiate criminal proceedings. There are examples in practice when the Prosecutor General's Office returned submissions and materials of inadequate quality to regional departments. 
Means of providing the institution of immunity
One of the most important measures for the implementation of the constitutional principle of immunity is the protection of the individual, office space, home, communications, transport used by judges. The state is also protected by documents, property and correspondence of officials. According to Art. 22 of the Basic Law, everyone in Russia has the right to legal immunity. However, the immunity of judges has been raised to a higher level in connection with the powers vested in them.
Accountability
It has a number of features. Thus, judges cannot be held liable for any opinion expressed by them in the course of their professional activity or for a decision taken, unless a verdict that has entered into legal force establishes guilt in criminal abuse or makes knowingly unlawful determinations, decisions and other acts .
Criminal Proceedings
The law establishes a special procedure regarding decisions to open such cases in relation to judges or to attract them as defendants in other proceedings. They are accepted by the Prosecutor General regarding officials:
- Supreme Arbitration Court.
- Supreme Court.
- Civil and military authorities of general jurisdiction of the middle level.
- Federal Arbitration Body (in accordance with the conclusion of the board of the Armed Forces on the presence in the actions of a crime and with the approval of the CCJ).
Decisions on the initiation of proceedings in relation to judges of other instances shall be taken at the conclusion of a panel consisting of 3 judges. The issue of bringing an official to administrative responsibility is considered in accordance with the presentation of the Prosecutor General in relation to employees:
- Constitutional instance.
- Sun.
- YOU.
- Judicial authorities of general jurisdiction.
Regarding officials of other instances, the issue of bringing to account for an administrative crime is decided in accordance with the conclusion of a panel of 3 authorized representatives and with the approval of the KKS of the corresponding region. 
Law Enforcement Restrictions
The immunity of judges is valid if they are detained on suspicion of committing illegal acts or for other reasons. Officials who are forcibly taken to any state bodies, if their identity was not known at the time of detention, should be released immediately after identification. The immunity of judges, as mentioned above, also applies to property of officials. In this regard, the things of the detainee cannot be inspected, except in cases expressly provided for by the Federal Law.
Investigative actions
The legislation provides for a special procedure for their implementation. Special rules apply to investigative actions.The latter may take place if no criminal proceedings have been instituted against the judge. After the opening of the case, the conduct of these measures is allowed in relation to judges:
- Constitutional instance.
- YOU.
- Institutions of general jurisdiction (military and civilian) mid-level.
- Federal Arbitration Bodies (according to the conclusion of the board of the Supreme Court).
Actions in relation to judges of other bodies are carried out in accordance with a decision of a panel of three officials, respectively, of instances of general jurisdiction.
Additionally
Penetration into the office premises, housing or transport used by a judge, seizure or search there, personal search, listening to conversations, seizure of correspondence, documents, property belonging to him is allowed only on the basis of and in connection with criminal proceedings against him. The consideration of the case at the request of the official filed before the start of the proceedings is carried out by the Supreme Court.