scholarly journals THE MANIFESTATION OF THE IDEA OF CONSTITUTIONALISM IN THE ACTIVITIES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DOES NOT EXCLUDE THE LEGAL UNCERTAINTY OF ITS DECISIONS

Issues of Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-117
Author(s):  
S. M. Darovskikh ◽  

The article, along with the positive influence of the legal positions formulated by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in its Decisions and Definitions on law enforcement practice and legislative activity, considers the reasons for the creation of these legal positions, legal uncertainty that negatively affects the activities of participants in criminal proceedings. The author refers to the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of July 16, 2015 No. 23-P «In the case of the verification of the constitutionality of the provisions of parts 3-7 of article 109 and part 3 of article 237 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the complaint of gr. S.V. Makhina» and the legal positions formulated by this court in other decisions regarding the possibility of increasing the maximum permissible period of detention specified in Article 109 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, concludes that with these decisions the possibility of taking into account the maximum period of detention is practically leveled

Issues of Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 89-93
Author(s):  
S.M. Darovskikh ◽  
◽  
Z.V Makarova ◽  

The article is devoted to the issues of formulating the definition of such a criminal procedural concept as «procedural costs». Emphasizing the importance both for science and for law enforcement of clarity and clarity when formulating the definition of criminal procedural concepts, the authors point out that the formulation of this concept present in the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is far from being improved. Having studied the opinions on this issue of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, a number of procedural scholars, the authors propose their own version of the definition of the concept of «criminal procedural costs» with its allocation in a separate paragraph of Article 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.


Author(s):  
Olga Andreeva ◽  
Viktor Grigoryev ◽  
Oleg Zaytsev ◽  
Tatiana Trubnikova

The problem of abuse of rights in the criminal process is currently widely discussed by both researchers and practicing specialists. However, until today there has been no large-scale representative research of law enforcement practice or surveys of law enforcement employees focusing on this issue. The article analyzes some results of researching the practice of law enforcement. The study was conducted by the authors in 2016–2017 within the framework of the project «Abuse of Rights in the Criminal Process: Systemic and Non-Systemic Manifestations, their Prevention and Suppression». The authors studied archives of criminal cases, appeal and cassational proceedings, complaints filed under Art. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, complaints from the archive of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, and published court judgments. The paper presents situations that were classified by law enforcers or could (according to expert evaluations) be classified as the abuse of rights by the criminal proceedings’ participants, the authors systematize the identified forms of the abuse of rights, evaluate the scale and character of these forms (systemic or non-systemic), determine causes and conditions that contributed to the emergence of some cases of the abuse of rights, describe measures of improving the criminal procedure legislation aimed at eliminating the causes of systemic abuse of rights, describe effective ways of preventing and suppressing some types of actual abusive behavior, argue that in some cases the abuse of legal rights is caused by the behavior of officials, and also that the state and law enforcers involved in a criminal case should show certain tolerance to the possible abuse of rights if it is not systemic in order to provide a maximally full legal protection of proceedings’ participants.


Author(s):  
Tatyana Plotnikova ◽  
Andrey Paramonov

In the current difficult conditions for the economy of our state, corruption crimes represent a higher level of danger. It is necessary to reform anti-corruption activities in order to increase its effectiveness. One of the radical measures in the field of anti-corruption will be the abolition of the presumption of innocence for corrupt illegal acts. The presumption of inno-cence is a fundamental and irremovable principle of criminal law, which is enshrined in article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. Violation of this principle is impossible for criminal proceedings, but modern circumstances require timely, prompt, and sometimes radical so-lutions. It is worth not to neglect the measures of “insuring” on the part of law enforcement agencies, since otherwise it will increase the share of cor-ruption crimes in law enforcement agencies. The content of paragraph 4 of article 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is man-datory even if the presumption of innocence for corruption crimes is can-celed: “A conviction cannot be based on assumptions”. At the same time, the principle of differentiation of punishment will be implemented by assigning the term of imprisonment from the minimum to the maximum, depending on the severity of the illegal act.


Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya

The purpose of this study was an attempt to theoretically understand the subject of judicial consideration of complaints against decisions, actions (inaction) of officials carrying out criminal prosecution. The research was carried out on the basis of comparative legal, formal logical, empirical, statistical methods. Judicial statistics for the year 2020 have been provided, and legislation has been studied from a historical and contemporary perspective, taking into account the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The problem is that, in practice, for about 20 years the courts have had difficulties in determining the subject of complaints, since neither in theory nor in practice a consensus has been developed on this issue. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation also does not contain a definition of the concept of «subject matter». The situation is aggravated by the presence of evaluative concepts in the text of the law, leading to a varied understanding of the subject of appeal by the courts, which leads to a violation of the constitutional rights of citizens at the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings. In the article, taking into account the analysis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, legislation and the opinion of scientists, a recommendation was made to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to specify the subject of consideration of complaints in accordance with Art. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in order to eliminate existing contradictions in practice and increase the level of protection of individual rights in pre-trial proceedings.


Author(s):  
Boris B. Bulatov ◽  
◽  
Alexander S. Dezhnev ◽  

The article examines the normative legal basis of the grounds for canceling property seizure in pre-trial criminal proceedings. The problem of the legislator’s usage of evaluative categories in removing investigator’s, interrogator’s or court’s restrictions is also analyzed. The solution of this problem is made dependent on the implementation of public or private interests. Discussing these issues, the authors come to the conclusion that this sphere is neither presented nor analyzed in academic monographic works. This circumstance indicates the novelty of the study owing to the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the issue. The conclusion about the priority of public principles over private interests concerning matters which are not related to civil lawsuits is made on the grounds of empirical data and the analysis of legislative approaches. The contradictions of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation regulating the basis and procedure for canceling property seizure and the laws on bankruptcy are identified. The directions for improving the legal regulation of these issues are presented. The necessity of a multisectoral regulation of some aspects of law enforcement is inferred. The examination of private principles in canceling property seizure is connected with securing a civil lawsuit in criminal proceedings. The authors substantiate the existence of additional opportunities in making decisions in this field via the legal regime. This regime is also used in some other legal acts and may be put into practice in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. However, the imposed restrictions can be canceled on the basis of the decision by a person considering a criminal case. The authors note the incoherence of some provisions of Part 3 and Part 9 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. This incoherence is connected with different approaches to the view on public and private interests in decision making. The authors substantiate the necessity of a legal linking of grounds for canceling property seizure with the decision on imposing this resriction. The conclusion about the comprehensive order of property seizure is made in the final part of the article. It is also stated that this order does not contain distinct criteria of the legality of the decision. Certain parts of the criminal procedure laws should be corrected. Some ways to improve the field of legal regulation concerning the opportunity of canceling seizure are given.


Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 71-78
Author(s):  
I. V. Smolkova

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 106-110
Author(s):  
O Yu Antonov

In article actual problems of using of the conclusions and evidence of specialist parties and the court, appointment of judicial examination before initiation of criminal case, including problems realization of related innovations of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; the proposals on improvement of legislation, law enforcement practice.


Author(s):  
Radik Rashitovich Lugmanov

The subject of this research is the principle of good faith in the Russian civil law, in versatility of its doctrinal understanding and complexity of substantive definition. The author describes the key approaches adopted in the Russian science, outlines certain flaws common to interpretation of this principle. It is noted that the usual interpretation of the principle of good faith, as a certain behavioral standard of the party to a contract, has no applicative avenue due to its natural meaninglessness and practical futility. Civil transaction requires predictability, certainty and stability, which is excluded without a uniform interpretation of the principle of good faith. Another subject of this research is the additional responsibilities that are directly related to the principle of good faith. The author indicated the problems of linear use of the formulas cited in law, since it also creates the grounds for legal uncertainty. The main conclusions are as follows: 1) Recognition of the special role of judicial system in revision, adaptation and development of the written law. This function of judiciary is implemented in the process of ordinary law enforcement under the auspices of referring to such general clauses as the principle of good faith. 2) Revision, development, or supplement of the law may cannot be done ad hoc. The court cannot introduce legal uncertainty into law enforcement. This requires special instruments in form of the strictly verifiable values, which would be the bases of law as a whole and civil law in particular. Such values are reflected in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and legal provisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Thus, the constitutionalization of private law is a natural process of translating socially significant values into the civil law by means of the principle of good faith.  


Author(s):  
A.I. Shmarev

The author of the article, based on the analysis of statistical indicators of the Prosecutor's office for 2018-2019 and examples of judicial practice, including the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, examines the problematic issues of implementing the right to rehabilitation of persons unlawfully and unreasonably subjected to criminal prosecution, and the participation of the Prosecutor in this process. According to the author, the ambiguous judicial practice of considering issues related to the rehabilitation of this category of citizens requires additional generalization and analysis in order to make appropriate changes to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 11 of 29.11.2011 "On the practice of applying the norms of Chapter 18 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation regulating rehabilitation in criminal proceedings". The examples given in the article of cancellation of lower-level court decisions were based on complaints of persons who independently sought to restore their rights, and not on the representations of the prosecutors involved in them, who were called upon to ensure the possibility of protecting human and civil rights and freedoms at the court session. The adoption of organizational measures, including those proposed by the author, in the system of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation will increase the role of the Prosecutor in protecting the rights of illegally and unreasonably prosecuted persons.


Globus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (7(64)) ◽  
pp. 45-46
Author(s):  
M.G. Mkrtychev

This article analyzes the application of the institution of prejudice in criminal proceedings when considering cases of crimes in the field of economic activity. The position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the application of Art. 90 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The problems of using the institution of prejudice in criminal proceedings in criminal cases on crimes in the sphere of economic activity are considered on practical examples.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document