Once again, the draft fundamental act of administrative legislation - the law of administrative procedure (initially – the Code of Administrative Procedure) is being elaborated before its submission to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for consideration. Given that in Ukraine there is a post-Soviet unavailability of the tradition of legislative regulation of the procedure under which executive authorities and local self-government bodies may make decisions and operate, the perception of the very idea of the general law (code) of administrative procedure by a significant circle of politicians, public servants, legal practitioners and scholars is predictably inappropriate. On the other part, the fundamental aspects of the draft law concept were discussed only during a few scientific events and did not come into the focus of a wider discussion. The purpose of the article is to highlight the conceptual aspects of the future general law (code) of administrative procedure and to invite a wider circle of scientists, politicians, public servants and legal practitioners to the discussion of its controversial issues. In broad terms, the pros of adopting the general law (code) of administrative procedure in Ukraine exceed its possible cons. Many of its provisions are similar to the court procedure codes, since the subject matter of legal regulation, among other things, also includes disputed (controversial) proceedings. Until a certain point, most of administrative proceedings do not face a legal dispute and the issue of whether it is appropriate to use the entire array of legal means having procedural nature. In this context, the draft law should more clearly delineate the simplified administrative proceedings aimed at resolving simple and non-contentious cases and the full proceedings which will really resemble a court process. The future law (code) of administrative procedure should be really general, that is, it should apply actually to every area of public administration. Each exception to this rule (if any) and a respective regulation of the administrative procedure in a special legislative act should be well-founded, but the differences of relevant provisions should not be excessive. The terminology of the draft law should be reconsidered once again. First of all, this should be done with the basic concept of “administrative act” which the author recommends using in a broader doctrinal sense, rather than merely in the sense of an individual decision of a respective subject of public administration.