scholarly journals Investigator’s covert-nature procedural activities

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 04011
Author(s):  
Marina Sergeevna Kolosovich ◽  
Lyudmila Vladimirovna Popova ◽  
Anna Fedorovna Zotova ◽  
Maria Mikhailovna Bondar ◽  
Olga Sergeevna Shamshina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Intelligence ◽  
The Russian Federation

Over the years, most of the Russian processualists denied the investigator’s right to engage in actions of covert nature and deemed it impossible to integrate the norms of criminal intelligence legislation in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation adopted on 18.12.2001 No. 174-FZ, rightly referring to the impossibility to vest a single duty-bearer engaged in a preliminary investigation with unprecedented powers. Meanwhile, the latest decades have been marked by active legislative activity in many countries, which in fact has turned covert criminal intelligence and surveillance into a procedural activity. These innovations became specific of a number of countries regardless of their legal system belonging to the Romano-Germanic or Anglo-Saxon legal system, testifying to more profound roots of the problem. The study is also relevant in terms of dissatisfaction, expressed by the Russian law-enforcement authorities, with the crime solvency rate and with the interaction of criminal intelligence detectives and internal affairs investigators. The goal of the study is to identify the procedural provisions governing the investigator’s covert-nature activities and related law enforcement problems. The methodological framework of the research comprises general and particular methods of scientific knowledge: dialectical, systemic, deductive, inductive; synthesis, analysis; comparative legal analysis, statistical and other methods. Results and novelty: it was concluded that the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for the regulation of the investigator’s confidential-nature activities inherent in covert criminal intelligence and surveillance and requiring more detailed elaboration, as concerns the issues of securing the rights of partakers of the said activity; the authors express doubt regarding the justification of the legislator’s differentiation of covert activities under criminal cases into covert investigative actions (Art. 185, 186, 186.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and covert operational and investigative operations that are in fact identical to the former (Art. 6, Cl. 9-11 of the Russian Federation Federal Law No. 144-FZ as of 12.08.1995 “On criminal intelligence and surveillance”.

scholarly journals Some Aspects of Prevention and Investigation of Damage to the Railway Telecommunications Facilities

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-365
Author(s):  
Igor Ozerov ◽  
Olga Katayeva ◽  
Denis Rudov ◽  
Elena Cherkasova ◽  
Anastasia Volchenko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
Telecommunications Infrastructure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The authors study the issues of preventing the damage to the railway telecommunications infrastructure by analyzing the current criminal procedure legislation, criminal legislation and criminalistics views on the methods and means of counteracting crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They present the algorithm of actions of the law enforcement employees and the specialists servicing the railway facilities when such offences take place. The authors analyze the procedural investigative activities regarding the employees of the organizations that service the railway infrastructure. The investigation of crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation requires expert knowledge in the sphere of servicing railway transport. The authors specifically examine some evidence acquired during the preliminary investigation and the methodology of some investigative actions (interrogation of witnesses, representatives of the aggrieved party, inspection of the crime scene). They analyze the procedure of evaluating the damage inflicted on sophisticated telecommunication facilities. They also single out a number of special characteristics of the investigative methodology for crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation when specialists in servicing complex telecommunications facilities are called to give testimony. It is noted that countries bordering on the Russian Federation and members of the Customs Union are gradually harmonizing their criminal and criminal procedure legislation with the legislation of the Russian Federation. The paper states that today the Russian Federation has sufficient legislative base to form a system of preventing crimes against railway telecommunications infrastructure. In conclusion the authors present a number of measures to counteract crimes under Art. 215.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, offer their brief description and the recommendations for using them. They stress the necessity of cooperation between the owners of the railway facilities, the law enforcement bodies and the mass media.

scholarly journals Problems of Protecting the Rights of a Private Prosecutor in Defamation Cases

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 651-660
Author(s):  
Natalya Artebyakina ◽  
Tatyana Makarova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Local Governance ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
False Information ◽  
Justices Of The Peace ◽  
The Russian Federation

The growing complexity of public relations creates a need for the criminalization of some acts and de-criminalization of others. Defamation is one of the offenses affected by this trend. Some time after its de-criminalization, the crime of defamation was brought back to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, there is no actual legal mechanism in Russia that victims of defamation could use to fully protect their rights. The authors point out a trend for acquittals in criminal proceedings initiated after the complaints of private prosecutors when they concern deliberately false information that besmirches the honor and dignity of other people and harms their reputation, when these complaints are filed with the governmental, including the law enforcement, authorities. They present their research of court statistical data regarding cases heard by Justices of the Peace under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation between 2014 and the first half of 2018. The authors have analyzed the practices of Justices of the Peace in Ulyanovsk Region on criminal cases initiated under Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. They use the examples of specific criminal cases to prove that judges use clauses of Art. 33 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and Art. 6 of the Federal Law «On the Procedure of Handling Applications of Citizens of the Russian Federation» when deciding cases based on Part 1, Art. 128.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and protect the right of citizens to appeal to the governmental (including law enforcement) authorities; they point out that an appeal to governmental or local governance cannot be viewed as spreading deliberately false information. In this case, private prosecutors have no opportunity to protect their rights even if it is proven that the information is deliberately false, and they also have to bear additional expenses connected with the recovery of procedural costs. Besides, the research includes a comparative legal analysis of legislation on defamation in a number of foreign countries (the USA, China, the UAE and others) as well as the historical-legal analysis of the development of Russian legislation on liability for defamation.

ADDITIONAL GUARANTEES OF DEFENSE OF RIGHTS AND LEGITIMATE INTERESTS OF JUVENILE SUSPECTS, ACCUSED ON THE STAGE OF THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 176-184
Author(s):  
I. I. Kartashov ◽  
M. A. Kamyshnikova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Juvenile Suspects

The article analyzes the provisions of the criminal procedure law to implement supplementary guaran-tees to defend the rights and legitimate interests of juvenile suspects, accused on the stage of preliminary inves-tigation. Based on the analysis of law enforcement practice, the authors propose changes to certain provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals PRESIDENTIAL CONTROL OVER OPERATIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITY SERVICE OF RUSSIA

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 58-62
Author(s):  
Anatoliy M. Tarasov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
State Control ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Intelligence ◽  
Security Service ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The relevant and innovative character of the subject of Presidential Control over Operations of the Federal Security Service of Russia is confirmed by the absence of separate research on this topic and the status of the Federal Security Service of Russia established to ensure security, carry out various types of law enforcement operations, in particular, such as criminal intelligence and surveillance, pre-trial investigation, interrogation, where human and civil rights and freedoms may be violated, and the guarantor of human and civil rights and freedoms is the President of the Russian Federation pursuant to Article 80 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The relevance of this subject is also proven by the absence of any federal law on the state control over operations of state authorities including law enforcement ones and the failure to establish the limits (scope) of the presidential control over operations of the Federal Security Service of Russia in statutory acts. The fact that the aims of the presidential control are not only identification of deviations in operations of the Federal Security Service but also the prevention of such deviations in the future raises the importance of this issue. In view of the above, the presidential control is a mechanism of positive, preventive and efficient influence on organizational and practical activities of authorities of the Federal Security Service of Russia.

scholarly journals Initiation of Criminal Proceedings against a Particular Person as the Ground for Recognizing him as a Suspect (para 1, part 1, art. 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation)

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 71-78
Author(s):  
I. V. Smolkova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper is devoted to the analysis of a new ground for recognition of a person as a suspect, introduced under the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, namely, the initiation of a criminal case against the person. The ground under consideration has caused controversial debates among criminal process scholars. The author has carried out a retrospective analysis of the legislative regulation of this ground for giving a person the status of the suspect. The paper evaluates various doctrinal approaches to its merits and disadvantages. The author also demonstartes the need for the new ground for recognition of a person as the suspect in law enforcement on the basis of statistical data, according to which more than half of criminal cases in Russia are initiated against a particular person. The study at question reveals an interconnection between initiation of proceedings upon commission of a crime and a particular person. The conclusion is substantiated that the recognition of a person as a suspect in case of initiation of criminal proceedings against him is aimed at ensuring his right to protection from criminal prosecution. However, the issuance of the order to initiate criminal proceedings against a particular person entails the possibility of implementation of coercive criminal procedural measures against him. It is shown that suspicion forms the substantive basis of recognition of a person as the suspect. The author criticises the approach according to which the issuance of the order to initiate criminal proceedings against a particular person forms an allegation that he has committed an act prohibited under the criminal law. Under this approach the assumption is made that can later be either proven or refuted in the course of further investigation. The author criticises the practice of dividing criminal cases into a judicial perspective and lacking such a perspective, which entails violations of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals suspected in committing crimes.

scholarly journals Criminal Procedure Code of Russia: Twenty Years Later (2001–2021)

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-188
Author(s):  
Oksana V. Kachalova ◽  
◽  
Viktor I. Kachalov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

Introduction. 2021 marks the 20th anniversary of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, adopted by the State Duma on November 22, 2001 by Federal Law No. 174-FZ. The development of criminal procedure legislation in these years was not always consistent, often characterized by chaotic and hasty measures. Nevertheless, the main factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, as well as the key trends in the legal regulation of criminal procedure legal relations, have remained fairly stable for twenty years. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The object of the study is the norms of criminal procedure law that have emerged and developed during the period of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation since 2001. The methodological basis of the study is the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which allowed us to study the subject of the study in relation to other legal phenomena, as well as general scientific methods of knowledge (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, analogy, and modelling) and private scientific methods of knowledge (formal legal, historical-legal, and comparative-legal). Results. Among the variety of various factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, there are several main ones: 1. The impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal proceedings. Having ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights and Freedoms in 1998, Russia voluntarily assumed obligations in the field of ensuring citizens rights and freedoms, as well as creating the necessary conditions for their implementation. Among the most important criminal procedure norms and institutions that have emerged in the system of criminal procedure regulation under the influence of the positions of the ECHR, the following are notable: a reasonable period of criminal proceedings, the rights of participants in the verification of a crime report, the disclosure of the testimony of an absent witness at a court session, and alternative preventive measures to detention. 2. Optimisation of procedural resources and improvement of the efficiency of criminal proceedings. From the very beginning of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, there was a special procedure for judicial proceedings, which is a simplified form of consideration of criminal cases, provided for in Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In 2009, this procedure was extended to cases with concluded pre-trial cooperation agreements (Chapter 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation), and in 2013, the institute of abbreviated inquiry appeared in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (Chapter 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). 3. Social demand for increasing the independence of the court, and the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings. Society’s needs to improve the independence of judges, increase public confidence in the court, transparency and quality of justice led to the reform of the jury court in 2016 (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 190-FZ). As a result of the reform, the court with the participation of jurors began to function at the level of district courts, the jurisdiction of criminal cases for jurors was expanded, the number of jurors was reduced from 12 to 8 in regional courts and 6 in district courts. However, practice has shown that sentences handed down by a court on the basis of a verdict rendered by a jury are overturned by higher courts much more often than others due to committed violations, which are associated, among other things, with the inability to ensure the objectivity of jurors. In the context of a request for an independent court, Article 81 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on the independence of judges (Federal Law of 2 July 2013 N 166-FZ) was adopted. 4. Reducing the degree of criminal repression. In the context of this trend, institutions have emerged in the criminal and criminal procedure laws that regulate new types of exemption from criminal liability. In 2011, Article 281 “Termination of criminal prosecution in connection with compensation for damage” was adopted, concerning a number of criminal cases on tax and other economic crimes (Federal Law of 7 December 2011 N 420). In 2016, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation introduced rules on the termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine (Federal Law of 3 July 2016 N 323-FZ). 5. Digitalisation of modern society. The rapid development of information technologies and their implementation in all spheres of public life has put on the agenda the question of adapting a rather archaic “paper” criminal process to the needs of today, and the possibilities of using modern information technologies in the process of criminal proceedings. Among the innovations in this area, it should be noted the appearance in the criminal procedure law of Article 1861 “Obtaining information about connections between subscribers and (or) subscriber devices” (Federal Law of 1 July 2010 N 143-FZ), Article 4741 “The procedure for using electronic documents in criminal proceedings” (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 220-FZ), the legal regulation of video-conferencing in criminal proceedings (Federal Law of 20 March 2011 N 39-FZ), and the introduction of audio recording of court sessions (Federal Law of 29 July 2018-FZ N 228-FZ), etс. Currently, the possibilities of further digitalisation of criminal proceedings, and the use of programs based on artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings, ets. are being actively discussed. Discussion and Conclusion. The main factors determining the vector of development of modern criminal justice should, in our opinion, include the impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal justice; optimisation of procedural resources and the need to improve the efficiency of criminal justice, social demands for strengthening the independence of the court, adversarial criminal proceedings; the needs of society to reduce the degree of criminal repression, and digitalisation of modern society.

scholarly journals Competitiveness of minors in the Russian Federation and the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States: comparative-legal research

2020 ◽  
pp. 104-110
Author(s):  
Svetlana Voronina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Independent States ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Codes ◽  
Cis Countries

The civil legislation of the Russian Federation and the CIS countries has many similarities, at the same time, there are certain discrepancies between the provisions of the civil codes on the negotiability of minors, the juxtaposition of which makes it possible to reveal the features of the civil capacity of minors distinguishing one legal system from all others. A comparative legal analysis of the experience of the CIS countries makes it possible to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the deal ability of minors, the problems of law enforcement and formulate proposals for improving legislation.

scholarly journals Remote Participation of the Accused (Suspect) at the Preliminary Investigation Stage as an Alternative to the Criminal Proceedings Stay

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 111-123
Author(s):  
O. G. Bondartseva
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Remote Participation

The participation of the accused at the stage of preliminary investigation presupposes the possibility of exercising his right to defense. However, in cases of being in a territory significantly remote from the location of the preliminary investigation body, including outside Russia, the impossibility of personal participation in investigative and other procedural actions, one of the ways of interaction between the accused and law enforcement agencies may be remote participation through electronic interaction systems, and video conferencing. Draft laws on the amendment into the RF Criminal Procedure Code on conducting investigative actions through video-conference communication were pending at the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in 2015 and 2018, but were not finalized and adopted. The provisions of the Second Additional Protocol to the European Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, providing for the simplification and acceleration of the procedure for providing mutual legal assistance in terms of the possibility of interrogating the accused (suspect) via videoconference, Russia, upon ratification of the protocol in 2019, did not allow to apply. In criminal cases of an economic nature, which reverberate in society and raise many questions about the activities of law enforcement agencies, large entrepreneurs often leave Russia, unable to remotely take part in investigative actions, present evidence in their defense, and get acquainted with procedural decisions in a criminal case. This leads to an increase in the number of suspended criminal cases, according to art. 208, part 1, clauses 1-3 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In 2019, the total number of economic criminal cases increased by 37% compared to 2018, while the number of suspended criminal cases under Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation increased by 15.83%, under Art. 159.1-159.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation — by 86.93%. The relevance of the topic is also due to the coronavirus pandemic, which limited the freedom of movement of Russian citizens both within the country and abroad. In this regard, the use of video-conferencing in the investigation of criminal cases is becoming a vital necessity, the imperative of the times.

scholarly journals On Regulatory Criteria for Classifying an Organization as a Non-State Expert Institution

2020 ◽  
pp. 123-126
Author(s):  
Olga N. Nadonenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Expert System ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legislative Regulation ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation

The current legislation formalizes three elements of the expert system in Russia: state and non-state expert institutions and experts who do not work in expert institutions. As follows from this triad, the defining concept is “expert institution”. The concept “state expert institution” is legally enshrined in Federal Law No. 73-FZ of May 31, 2001, but there is currently no legislative regulation of the criteria for classifying an organization as a “non-state expert institution”, which gives rise to a number of law enforcement problems. For instance, for an investigator, determining the status of an organization entails the implementation of the provisions of Article 199 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation under Clause 1.2 or Clause 4. Therefore, in the author’s opinion, it is extremely important to pass a law regulating the criteria for classifying an organization as a state or non-state expert institution, or a non-expert institution.

scholarly journals Prosecutor’s Decision as a Cause for Initiating Criminal Proceedings: Problems of Improving the Legislation

Legal Concept ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 131-139
Author(s):  
Natalia Solovyova ◽  
Altyn Ilyasova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compliance With The Law

Introduction: in the paper the authors reveal the essence of one of the causes for initiating a criminal case, the socalled fourth cause with the title “the prosecutor’s decision to send relevant materials to the preliminary investigation body to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution”; actual problems associated with the implementation of the powers of the Prosecutor’s office at the stage of initiating a criminal case; the essence of the supervisory powers of the Prosecutor’s office (Prosecutor) at the stages of criminal proceedings. Addressing this topic is due to the main purpose – the consideration of the concept of “prosecutor’s decision as a cause for initiating a criminal case” in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, as well as the study of topical problems of implementing the powers of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) when considering the issue of ensuring compliance with the principle of legality at all the stages of criminal proceedings. Methods: the methodological framework for the study was the general scientific method of cognition, including the principle of objectivity, consistency, induction and deduction. In the context of this method and in connection with it, the general logical methods of theoretical analysis and specific scientific methods (comparative law, technical and legal analysis, concretization, interpretation) were used. Results: considering the concept of “prosecutor’s decision as a cause for initiating a criminal case”, the authors drew attention to the role of the prosecutor in making the relevant decision on the activity management of the preliminary investigation body, indicated, that in criminal procedure law of this state the most important function of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) is the supervision over compliance with rule of law by all the bodies and officials, by virtue whereof, in practice, the implementation of two mutually exclusive powers of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) can lead to the imbalance in the full implementation of the principles of criminal procedure at all procedural stages. Conclusions: as a result of the study, the authors come to the conclusion that in order to implement fair justice at the stages of criminal proceedings, it is necessary to make appropriate changes in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, since the combination in one body of powers to initiate criminal proceedings (in particular, sending a corresponding resolution to the preliminary investigation body to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution) and the powers to supervise over compliance with the law by the preliminary investigation bodies is impossible in practice; it requires additional research and appropriate changes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document