Responsibility in constitutional law is governed by a set of principles and norms. They suggest an impact on officials in case of non-compliance with the provisions of the Basic Law. The purpose of the established measures is to stop unlawful actions or restore violated rights. Meanwhile, the Constitution provides for certain exemptions for certain categories of employees. To them, in particular, are deputies. These persons have immunity. Does this mean that prosecution of a deputy impossible? We will understand this further. 
Immunity
In accordance with applicable law, it is not allowed criminal prosecution without the consent of the highest representative body. The exception is cases when he is detained at the crime scene. Without the consent of the highest representative body is not allowed and administrative responsibility of deputies. According to general rules, these persons cannot be arrested, detained, searched, or searched. The exception is cases where these actions are necessary to ensure public order and security. The immunity of a parliamentarian extends to office, residential, personal and official vehicles, baggage, correspondence, the means of communication that he uses, as well as to documentation that belongs to him.
Sanctions for public statements
For the position, opinion expressed during voting, other actions detracting from the honor and dignity of citizens and legal entities, the legislation provides administrative responsibility. Deputies this rule does not apply until they are inviolable. A similar requirement applies when parliamentarians have slandered in a public statement or other violations, for which sanctions are established by the Criminal Code. Only after the deprivation of an official immunity can come criminal liability. Deputy You can not interrogate until the consent of the highest representative body is obtained. At the same time, the parliamentarian has the right to express refusal to testify in the case of facts that he became aware of in connection with the exercise of his powers. It should be emphasized that these rules apply only if there is immunity.
Procedural Issues
As stated above criminal liability of a deputy comes after the deprivation of his mandate. Accordingly, if proceedings are instituted against the parliamentarian, the inquiry body / investigator must inform the Prosecutor General about this. 3 days are given for notification. If the authorized bodies have sufficient grounds to hold a deputy accountable for violations committed by him in the exercise of his powers, the Prosecutor General is obliged to notify the lower house of the FS about this fact by sending a statement about the deprivation of his integrity. To complete this action, he has no more than a week. After the completion of the preliminary investigation, inquiry, administrative proceedings, providing for liability imputed in court, materials cannot be transferred to court without the consent of the State Duma. 
Explanations
Responsibility of a deputy of the State Duma comes in a special order. The presence of special rules for parliamentarians is associated with a rather high status of these persons.At its core, immunity provides for maximum protection for employees in their activities. Meanwhile, within the meaning of constitutional provisions, the integrity of parliament does not mean that bring a deputy to administrative responsibility or he cannot be charged with punishment under the Criminal Code at all. In order to impose appropriate sanctions, the fact of committing a violation not in the performance of their duties must be proved. A broad interpretation of immunity would lead to a distortion of the public law nature of immunity and its transformation into an individual privilege. Accordingly, this would mean, on the one hand, the exclusion from the Constitution of the principle of the equality of all subjects before the law, and on the other, an infringement of the rights of victims as a result of abuse of power. In this regard, although with reservations, it is allowed to conduct proceedings at the stage of preliminary investigation or inquiry or administrative violation before making a decision on the transfer of materials collected in the case to the court on the basis of the provisions of the Criminal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Administrative Offenses without the consent of the lower house.
Nuances
Investigative actions against parliamentarians should be carried out under the direct supervision of the Prosecutor General. It is this official who submits to the supreme legislative body the idea of depriving a member of the lower house of immunity. If the State Duma, having considered the petition, does not take a decision by the majority, then the question of bringing it to court will be removed. To start the proceedings, the consent of the legislature is required. 
findings
Bringing a deputy to administrative responsibilitywho committed an offense not in the performance of his duties, as well as the imposition of punishment for him for a crime under the Criminal Code, is allowed only by special rules. Parliamentarians must abide by the provisions of the law. Constitutional responsibility of a deputy of the Russian Federation, as a rule, has a moral and political character. Parliamentarians are required to comply with ethical standards. Responsibility of the deputy for their violation is provided for in the Rules of the representative body. Parliamentarians are required to submit income statements and information about the property they own. Data on violations discovered during verification of documents of the Federal Tax Service are published in the Vedomosti FS.
Responsibility of deputies of local government
It is provided for in Article 24 of the Federal Law No. 131. The normative act establishes deputy's responsibility in front of citizens. The basis for its occurrence are only specific unlawful actions of the person, as well as inaction or decisions that are not in accordance with the law and confirmed by the court. It follows that a meeting must first be held at which the fact of a violation is established. The court decision, in turn, is the basis for initiating the recall procedure. The initiative should come directly from the population - residents of the Moscow Region.
The procedure for imputing punishment for a crime
As the 447th article of the CPC indicates, deputy's responsibility the representative structure of territorial power comes in a special order. The decision to start production is made by the head of the IC of Russia in the relevant region. According to Art. 40 Federal Law No. 131, Not Provided deputy's responsibility for the expressed position, opinion expressed during the vote, as well as for other actions corresponding to its status. This rule also applies after the expiration of his term of office. However, it does not apply to cases where a person has committed public insults, defamation or other violations for which a penalty is established under federal law.If at the end of the criminal proceedings against the deputy a guilty verdict will be passed, then, according to paragraph 5 of the 10th part of the 40th article of the Federal Law No. 131, the procedure for withdrawing the mandate cannot be applied. This is explained by the fact that the authority of a person is terminated in such a case ahead of schedule. It does not matter when the crime was committed - directly in the performance of his duties or in the case when the subject acted as an individual. The consequences in both situations will be the same. 
Sanctions on the Code of Administrative Offenses
According to the Code, a guilty, unlawful omission / action of a legal entity or citizen, for which administrative responsibility is provided, is an offense. Meanwhile, a member of a representative territorial authority cannot solely be a legal entity. He is considered directly the structure in which he is a deputy. Accordingly, sanctions under the Code of Administrative Offenses can be imputed to him only as an individual acting as a people's deputy. At the same time, the Code provides for the responsibility of a special subject - an official. Sanctions may be imposed if it improperly performed or did not perform at all its official duties. In this case, an official should be understood as a citizen temporarily or by special authority acting as a representative of an authority. In other words, this entity is vested with administrative powers in relation to persons who are not under official authority. Citizens who carry out organizational, administrative or administrative functions in state bodies, territorial authorities, municipal and state organizations should be included in this category. Given all these signs, it is possible to draw a fair conclusion that a deputy who is exclusively a people's deputy cannot be an official. Accordingly, the sanctions provided for employees cannot be imputed to him. Administrative responsibility of the elected representative is provided for in the CAO only in two articles - 5.50 and 5.17. In the latter case, sanctions may be imputed for failure to submit, within the prescribed time limit, a report, information on the sources and amount of financial resources allocated to the election fund, on campaign expenses, and incomplete provision of these data. Punishment is provided for the provision of false information. According to Art. 5.50, liability arises for the non-return of donations, or part thereof, of the donations transferred to the electoral fund, established by law, if election standards have been violated, and non-deduction of funds made by individuals anonymously to the appropriate budget. 
The specifics of the application of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses
In imposing administrative sanctions, the court takes into account the nature of the misconduct, the identity of the deputy, his property status. Mitigating circumstances are also taken into account. These, in particular, include voluntary elimination of consequences arising from misconduct, compensation for damage.
Statutes of limitations
They are provided for by Art. 4.5 CAO. The decision on the considered administrative case cannot be adopted after 3 months. from the moment of misconduct. As indicated in paragraph 1.1 of the article. 24.5, the proceedings cannot be instituted, and the commenced work must be completed if the statutory time limits established by Article 4.5 have expired. At the same time, the person to whom the sanction was imputed shall be deemed to have been punished within one year from the date of his appointment. Thus, with respect to the deputy, a recall procedure may be initiated for a little over a year from the date of the misconduct.
Mandatory conditions
The recall of the deputy is carried out in a certain order.First of all, the corresponding initiative from the population should come. On its basis, a referendum is organized. A prerequisite is the formation of an initiative group. She sends to the body authorized by the charter of the Moscow Region, regional or federal law, signatures of citizens supporting the procedure. For the recall of a deputy must vote at least half of the voters who are registered in the MO. In other words, the rules of the majority system apply. To vote for the recall, the turnout threshold is actually set. To achieve in practice compliance with all conditions will be very problematic. According to lawyers, such requirements virtually exclude the recall of a deputy who has suffered administrative responsibility. 
Disciplinary action
They are provided by law for employees of state bodies, territorial structures of power. According to general rules, disciplinary sanctions are imposed in respect of persons under subordination. The court procedure in such cases does not apply. At the same time, the deputy of the municipality does not apply to officials, as we found out above. Disciplinary sanctions are chosen for the elect according to a special order. This is due to the fact that their labor functions are realized in special conditions. Disciplinary responsibility is established by a special act - Regulation of the legislative body of the Ministry of Defense. Accordingly, sanctions can be imputed to the chosen one only on the basis of this document. Accordingly, only a representative body can be held accountable. 
Conclusion
As follows from the foregoing, to attract a deputy is very problematic, and in most cases impossible. Specialists who analyze the legislation come to the conclusion that the measures to prevent violations committed by these persons are imperfect. According to some authors, it is precisely the gaps in the norms that cause the spread of corruption and other illegal actions. In this regard, it is proposed to revise a set of measures of responsibility for representatives of the legislative branch, to simplify the procedure for holding them accountable. This is especially true for people elected in municipalities. The existing order today, according to some experts, does not allow to fully realize the independence of the population in the sphere of managing the affairs of the Moscow Region.