A December communication from the head of Russia’s Ministry of Internal Affairs, Vladimir Kolokoltsev, to the Chairman of the State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, sparked a debate over deputies who conducted checks at so-called nalivayki—venues that sell alcohol inside private residences, including at night, which have drawn media attention. The correspondence was obtained by two State Duma sources and published in a compiled copy.
Kolokoltsev argued that such inspections risk creating a misleading impression of police inaction. He stressed that regulating trade and commerce does not fall under police powers, highlighting the separation of responsibilities among government agencies in this area.
The minister also referenced the current moratorium on unscheduled inspections of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs. He noted that, following President Vladimir Putin’s directive, there is consideration of extending the moratorium through 2024, a move aimed at stabilizing supervisory practices during a transitional period.
Nevertheless, the letter contends that certain deputies of the State Duma, along with some federal media outlets, disregard the moratorium and proceed with inspections in commercial settings under the guise of public oversight. Kolokoltsev recalled that on November 21 he was shown a news report about a nighttime inspection of licensed stores selling alcohol in Moscow, in which a member of parliament, Biysultan Khamzaev of the United Russia party, participated.
The minister asserted that Khamzaev misled viewers by portraying the police as habitually inactive when it comes to regulating alcohol vendors. He reiterated that regulatory activities within trade and commerce do not fall under law enforcement duties. Addressing the speaker of the lower house, Kolokoltsev urged clear communication to deputies about the leadership’s stance on the non-interference of law enforcement agencies in commercial activities.
In related developments, the Federal Tax Service (FTS) and the Federal Security Service (FSB) announced investigations into illicit secret brewing schemes valued in the tens of billions of dollars, signaling heightened scrutiny in the sector.
Earlier reports indicated pending regulatory changes affecting the sale of alcohol in Russian dining establishments, signaling a broader reshaping of how alcohol is marketed and distributed in the hospitality sector.
Citizens and industry observers alike are watching how the government will balance supervisory duties with the need to avoid conflating policing with routine market regulation. Analysts note that precise delineation of authority remains essential to prevent mixed messages about government responsiveness while ensuring adherence to alcohol trade laws. The broader question centers on how future moratorium extensions and supervisory reforms will interact with ongoing criminal investigations and revenue protection initiatives.
Officials emphasize that any actions by public figures in the oversight process should be framed within legal boundaries and transparent procedures to maintain public trust. The ongoing discussions reflect a continuing effort to streamline governance, minimize misperceptions about law enforcement, and reinforce the proper channels through which trade compliance is enforced.
Notes accompany the coverage indicating that the cited topics involve high-level policy decisions and ongoing enforcement initiatives, with defenders of the current approach arguing that regulatory clarity is in the national interest. Critics, meanwhile, call for a more visible and accountable police role in addressing unlawful trade activities, arguing that public confidence hinges on consistent, lawful oversight rather than selective enforcement.
Overall, the situation illustrates the delicate balance between police duties, parliamentary oversight, and administrative control over commercial operations within the Russian economy. Marked citations are provided below to reflect the reported statements and actions without direct external linking.