The article deals with the theoretical foundations of the institutions of direct democracy in modern Russia and provides their classification. The institutions of direct democracy include a referendum, elections, voting on the recall of a deputy, a member of an elected body or an elected official of local self-government, a citizens' meeting, and participatory institutions. In Russia, institutions of direct democracy exist at all three levels of public power: at the federal level, at the level of subjects of the Russian Federation, and at the municipal level. The authors draw attention to the "electronic" kind of democracy, which is implemented with the help of electronic, technical means and virtual space. However, when implementing it, there are still relevant issues of ensuring the secrecy of voting and the anonymity of the voter, protecting voters' declaration of will from potential fraud with the participation of technical staff, and finally ensuring equal access of all citizens having voting rights to the Internet. The authors studied the legislation and practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation demonstrating the peculiarity of direct democracy in modern Russia. The absence of a unified approach to the institution of direct democracy in the current legislation is revealed. The relation between the levels of public power and the regulation of institutions of direct democracy is shown. The institution of referendum at the federal level is currently one of the most problematic institutions of direct democracy in Russia ambiguously evaluated in the academic community. The legal phenomenon of "institution of direct democracy" investigated in the article is key in the concept of a law-bound state. The article uses the dialectical method of scientific knowledge, as well as logical, historical, and systemic methods. Methods of analysis and synthesis were of particular importance. The functional method is applied to study the main directions of the development of the institution of direct democracy. The authors identify gaps and shortcomings of the current legislation in the field of the "institution of citizen participation", which involves the real direct participation of people or part of it in the exercise of public power equally and in close cooperation with public authorities or local governments; therefore, unlike institutions of discussion, it can be included into institutions of direct democracy. The authors propose to adopt the federal law "On Institutions of Discussion and Participation in the Exercise of Public Power in the Russian Federation", which will establish a distinction between institutions of participation and institutions of discussion, indicating all their essential features.