scholarly journals Seizure of Property as a Way to Ensure Compensation for Damage Caused by a Crime: Theory and Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-210
Author(s):  
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov ◽  
Marina Vladimirovna Sokolova ◽  
Oksana Leonidovna Podustova ◽  
Pavel Vladimirovich Fadeev ◽  
Alexey Yurievich Molyanov
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Crime Theory ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Identifying Property

The authors consider the theoretical provisions and analyze practical examples of the activities of the investigative bodies to seize property in pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases. The relevance of this topic is determined by the fact that one of the priority activities of the preliminary investigation bodies at present is to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of citizens against criminal encroachments. The possibility of compensation to victims of harm caused by a crime in criminal procedure law is a guarantee of protection of these rights and contributes to the implementation of the purpose of criminal proceedings. Based on the results obtained, the authors conclude that it is necessary to further improve the law enforcement practice and the norms of criminal and criminal-procedure legislation in order to improve the efficiency of solving problems of identifying property that can be seized. In this connection, it is proposed to amend Part 3 of Article 104.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, providing for the possibility of confiscation of property, regardless of the awareness of the causal relationship between the committed act and the presence of money or other property.Keywords: Criminal proceedings; Measures of procedural coercion; Investigator; Inquirer; Civil claim Penyitaan Properti sebagai Cara untuk Memastikan Kompensasi atas Kerusakan yang Disebabkan oleh Kejahatan: Teori dan Praktik AbstrakPenulis mempertimbangkan ketentuan teoritis dan menganalisis contoh praktis dari kegiatan badan investigasi untuk menyita properti dalam proses pra-persidangan dalam kasus pidana. Relevansi topik ini ditentukan oleh fakta bahwa salah satu kegiatan prioritas badan investigasi pendahuluan saat ini adalah memastikan hak dan kepentingan sah warga negara terhadap perambahan kriminal. Kemungkinan pemberian ganti rugi kepada korban kerugian yang diakibatkan oleh suatu tindak pidana dalam hukum acara pidana merupakan jaminan perlindungan terhadap hak-hak tersebut dan turut menunjang terlaksananya tujuan proses pidana. Berdasarkan hasil yang diperoleh, penulis menyimpulkan bahwa perlu lebih meningkatkan praktik penegakan hukum dan norma-norma peraturan perundang-undangan pidana dan acara pidana untuk meningkatkan efisiensi penyelesaian masalah identifikasi harta benda yang dapat disita. Sehubungan dengan itu, diusulkan untuk mengubah Bagian 3 Pasal 104.1 KUHP Federasi Rusia, yang mengatur kemungkinan penyitaan properti, terlepas dari kesadaran akan hubungan sebab akibat antara tindakan yang dilakukan dan adanya uang atau properti lainnya.Kata Kunci: Proses pidana; Tindakan paksaan prosedural; Peneliti; Penanya; Klaim sipil. Наложение ареста на имущество в целях обеспечения возмещения вреда, причиненного преступлением: теория и практика АннотацияАвторами рассматриваются теоретические положения и анализируются практические примеры деятельности органов расследования по наложению ареста на имущество в досудебном производстве по уголовным делам. Актуальность данной темы определяется тем, что одним из приоритетных направлений деятельности органов предварительного следствия в настоящее время является обеспечение прав и законных интересов граждан от преступных посягательств. Возможность возмещения потерпевшим вреда, причиненного преступлением, в уголовно-процессуальном праве является гарантией защиты данных прав и способствует реализации назначения уголовного судопроизводства. На основе полученных результатов авторы приходят к выводу о необходимости дальнейшего совершенствования правоприменительной практики и норм уголовного и уголовно-процессуального законодательства в целях повышения эффективности решения задач по установлению  имущества, на которое может быть наложен арест. В связи с чем предлагают внести в ч. 3 ст. 104.1 УК РФ изменения, предусматривающие возможность конфискации имущества, вне зависимости от осведомленности о причинно-следственной связи между совершенным деянием и наличием денег или иного имущества.Ключевые слова: Ключевые слова: уголовное судопроизводство, меры процессуального принуждения, следователь, дознаватель, гражданский иск

scholarly journals THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION: PROBLEMS OF THE OBJECT AND THE OBJECTIVE SIDE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Alexandra Vladimirovna Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Complex Analysis ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Body ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject. The article is devoted to the investigation of the main direct object and the circle of victims are subjected of harm by criminal acts stipulated by pts. 1, 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.The purpose of the paper is to identify does the art. 294 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation meets the other provisions of criminal procedure legislation.The methodology of research includes methods of complex analysis, synthesis, as well as formal-logical, comparative legal and formal-legal methods.Results and scope of application. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The discrep-ancy lies in terms of the range of participants in criminal proceedings and the functions performed by them, as well as the actual content and correlation of such stages of criminal proceedings as the initiation of criminal proceedings and preliminary investigation. In addi-tion, the current state of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not take into account the ever-widening differentiation of criminal proceedings.The circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented by such participants in the criminal process as a criminal investi-gator, the head of the investigative body, the head of the inquiry department, the head of the body of inquiry. At the same time, the author supports the position that the criminal-legal protection of the said persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.The circle of criminal acts provided for in art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Fed-eration, should also be specified with an indication of encroachment in the form of kidnapping, destruction or damage to such a crime as materials of criminal, civil and other cases, as well as material evidence.Conclusions. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The author formulates the conclusion that the circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code should be broadened and joins the position that the criminal-legal protection of these persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.

CURRENT ISSUES OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MINORS IN THE CONTEXT OF MODERN REALITY

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-164
Author(s):  
Svetlana V. Verkhoturova ◽  
Oksana V. Pavlenko
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Made In

This article examines the current theoretical and practical issues of criminal proceedings against minors in the light of recent changes in the criminal procedure legislation. The research was conducted using formal-logical and dialectic methods, as well as the comparative-legal method when analyzing criminal and legal proceedings against minors. The authors conclude that a number of existing criminal procedure norms regulating the preliminary investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court against minors do not meet international standards and require further improvement. This article draws attention to the procedural errors of investigators (inquirers) and judges that are allowed in the process of investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court in relation to minor suspects, accused persons, defendants. The lack of sufficient legal regulation in the criminal procedure law is called the main reason for the mistakes made in the criminal proceedings against minors. In order to solve the identified problems, the authors propose to make appropriate additions to the current criminal procedure law.

scholarly journals Legacy of M. S. Strogovich and Modern Problems of Functional-Legal Construction of Criminal Pre-Trial Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 495-513
Author(s):  
Yu. V. Derishev
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Scientific Heritage ◽  
125Th Anniversary ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Definition Of

In November 2019, the world legal community widely celebrated the 125th anniversary of Professor M. S. Strogovich, who, according to his scientific colleagues and students, was a scientist who was “ahead of time”.This article provides a retrospective and comparative analysis of the positions of M. S. Strogovich and his colleagues on certain problems of domestic criminal proceedings, in particular its pre-trial phase, in the context of the direct influence of the scientist's scientific heritage on the development of modern criminal procedure law. The Author of the article particularly interesting views of the scientist and his participation in discussions related to defining the essence and purpose of the preliminary investigation, the implementation of the functions of preliminary investigation in relation to criminal prosecution, the problems of implementation of the principles of presumption of innocence and the adversarial nature of pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases, and, finally, the General Manager of the “investigative case” in modern Russia.M. S. Strogovich consistently adhered to the idea of the need to develop and strengthen procedural guarantees of individual rights, guarantees of justice, and this can be seen in this article. Thus, defining the essence of the criminal process as a system of actions of the relevant officials and the procedural legal relations that arise in connection with them, which in itself was a serious “scientific courage” of those years, M. S. Strogovich particularly defended the position that all participants in criminal proceedings are subjects of the rights granted to them and the duties assigned to them, and they should not be considered objects of unilateral power of officials. This idea has become widespread and generally accepted as the basic definition of domestic (Soviet and Russian) criminal proceedings.The article analyzes M. S. Strogovich’s scientific steps on the conceptual turn from revolutionary-radical ideas about the construction of criminal proceedings to its classical canons and traditions of the Russian criminal process, On the basis of which the conclusion is made about the indispensable use of the scientist's legacy in modernьRussian procedural studies.The research of M. S. Strogovich’s legacy carried out in the article will fully allow to rethink the modern system of criminal proceedings in a new way, can be used as a kind of key to finding solutions to law-making and law enforcement problems, for the further development of the national science of criminal procedure law.

SOME QUESTIONS OF PROCEDURAL POWERS IMPLEMENTATION BY EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL PENITENTIARY SERVICE OF RUSSIA WHEN MAKING PROCEDURAL DECISIONS AT THE STAGE OF INITIATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2020 ◽  
pp. 144-148
Author(s):  
Александр Валентинович Черезов
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Procedural Decisions

В статье рассматриваются актуальные проблемы реализации уголовно-процессуальных полномочий органов и учреждений УИС в стадии возбуждения уголовного дела. В частности, рассмотрена проблема и дано определение компетенции органов дознания и предварительного следствия, предусмотренной УПК РФ. Исследован объем уголовно-процессуальных прав и обязанностей органов дознания и следствия, а также оперативных подразделений УИС в системе иных органов дознания и следствия. Проведен анализ порядка принятия решений уполномоченными должностными лицами ФСИН России при проверке сообщений о преступлениях, выражено мнение о том, что они вправе принимать только одно решение: о передаче сообщения о преступлении по подследственности и в исключительных случаях возбуждать уголовные дела в порядке, предусмотренном ст. 157 УПК РФ. Рассмотрены причины, на основании которых законодатель уменьшил полномочия оперативных подразделений ФСИН России как органа дознания. Рассмотрены актуальность применения ст. 157 УПК РФ в части возбуждения уголовных дел и проведения по ним неотложных следственных действий, а также роль начальников органов и учреждений УИС в их проведении. На основании рассмотренных проблем подведен итог о нечеткой регламентации процессуальных полномочий органов и учреждений ФСИН России в уголовно-процессуальном законе и подзаконных актах на стадии возбуждения уголовного дела. The article deals with the actual problems of implementation of the criminal procedure powers of the criminal procedure authorities and institutions at the stage of criminal proceedings. In particular, we consider the problem and the definition of the competence of bodies of inquiry and preliminary investigation under code of criminal procedure. The volume of criminal procedure rights and obligations of operational divisions of the criminal investigation department in the system of other bodies of inquiry and investigation is studied. The analysis of the procedure for decision-making by authorized officials of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia when checking reports of crimes is carried out. The reasons why the legislator reduced the powers of operational divisions of the Federal penitentiary service of Russia as a body of inquiry are considered. The relevance of the application of article 157 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation in terms of criminal cases and conducting urgent investigative actions on them, as well as the role of the heads of criminal investigation bodies and institutions in their conduct, were reviewed. Based on the problems discussed, the author summarizes the lack of regulation of the procedural powers of the Federal Penitentiary Service bodies and institutions in the criminal procedure law and by-laws at the stage of initiation of a criminal case.

scholarly journals Categories of Rights and Lawful Interests of Individuals and Their Use in the Sphere of Criminal Justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-147
Author(s):  
Alexander Grinenko ◽  
Georgii Gudzhabidze ◽  
Vasily Potapov ◽  
Nikolay Zheleznyak
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Legitimate Interest ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Correct Understanding

Categories of rights and legitimate interests of a person are among the most essential in modern legal science, legislation and law enforcement practice. These categories are of particular importance in the field of criminal proceedings. The outcome of the preliminary investigation and trial in criminal cases largely depends on the correct understanding and subsequent application of these categories. The state should not only recognize, but also guarantee the possibility to exercise the rights and legitimate interests of an individual, enshrined at various levels, up to the international law. The study of the use of the legal concept of «personality» in various areas of law, including criminal procedure, indicates its application in the widest sense as a synonym for the concept of «a human». The law refers to a human as a person, regardless of the capacity in which he acts in specific legal relations. Categories «human», «individual», «personality», «person», «citizen» in the field of criminal proceedings can be considered synonymous. Some special characteristics arise not from differences in the general social status, but solely from the specific procedural status granted to a person in connection with criminal proceedings. In the research publications, the words «rights» and «freedoms» of the individual are considered identical, i.e. synonyms, and are described through the category of «opportunities». But for the recognition of such opportunities, it is not always required for them to be enshrined in the criminal procedure law. The category of «legitimate interest» has a specific meaning and differs from the categories of «rights and freedoms» of an individual. Legitimate interests are not indicated in the law itself because their scope of application is wider than the scope of law implementation. But such interests should not contradict the law, i.e. the provisions of the current legislation. A fundamental change in states perception of the individual has led to a significant change of the doctrine and content of criminal proceedings aimed primarily at protecting the rights and legitimate interests of the individual.

scholarly journals The concept of innocence in criminal procedure

2021 ◽  
pp. 49-58
Author(s):  
Elena Vyacheslavovna Panteleeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Understanding ◽  
The Comparative Study

The concept of “innocence” is an important category of criminal proceedings; alongside the concept of “guilt”, it is the central question resolved in the course of proceedings in criminal cases. However, this term remains poorly studied in theory and legislation. The article examines the instances, in which the concept of “innocence” is used in the text of the current criminal procedure law. Analysis of the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation that establish the circumstance in proof, regulate the questions of rendering verdict by jurors and court sentence, as well as prescriptions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reveals a number of issues related to the normative theory of innocence. The comparative study conducted on the Articles 73, 299, 339, 302 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation allows detecting contradictions in the scope of the concepts of guilt and innocence used therein. The author distinguishes between the factual and legal understanding of innocence, as well as substantiates the need for the existence of its specific type – presuming innocence. The arguments are advanced for the possibility of declaring the defendant not guilty based on the acquittal of the jury. For enhancing legal certainty, the author offers the original concept of innocence. The conclusion is made that the issues associated with the normative theory of innocence cause difficulties in law enforcement, and their resolution may affect the accuracy of establishing circumstances in proof, as well as the final court decision.

Judicial Control and Prosecutorial Supervision in the System of Guarantees for Observing the Rights and Freedoms of a Suspect Person

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 792
Author(s):  
Talgat T. DYUSSEBAYEV ◽  
Aizhan A. AMANGELDY ◽  
Talgat T. BALASHOV ◽  
Ainur A. AKIMBAYEVA ◽  
Kuanysh ARATULY ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Cis Countries ◽  
Special Studies

In the process of reforming the criminal procedure legislation, the institution of the prosecutor’s office has become one of its important aspects. The judiciary, being one of the independent and autonomous branches of power in criminal proceedings, which is a system of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens, is by far the most effective structure for protecting human rights. The article reveals the essence of judicial control and prosecutorial supervision, identifies a number of problems in the form of potential threats to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of a suspect (accused) in this form of preliminary investigation. As a result of the study, the following was stated. The current provisions of the CIS constitutions regulating the sphere of human rights and freedoms have made it possible to single out separate independent areas in the activities of the prosecutor’s office. Based on the practical problems that arise in the conditions of the new Criminal Procedure Code in the CIS countries, the authors consider it reasonable that the current oversight functions assigned to the prosecution authorities in ensuring the rights and freedoms of a suspect and an accused during the investigation, necessitate further special studies with the aim of development of evidence-based proposals for their resolution.  

scholarly journals Criminal legal basis for an expedited trial procedure provided by the chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-208
Author(s):  
A. V. Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Court Proceedings

The subject of study is the criminal-legal basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling when the accused person agrees with the charge. These issues are relevant, since in July 2020 the substantive legal basis of the expedited procedure in Russia was changed and now this procedure can only be applied in criminal cases of small and medium gravity.The aim of this work is to study the substantive legal basis of an expedited procedure of litigation from the point of view of the changes were made to it. The author expresses the thesis that the legislators did not quite reasonably link criminal-legal grounds of the expedited procedure with the system of categories of crimes.The methodology. The author used general scientific methods (dialectical, historical, methods of formal logic, system analysis) as well as method of formal legal interpretation of Russian Criminal Code and judicial decisions of Russian courts.The main results, scope of application. The criminal and legal basis of certain criminal procedure is a package of criminal law standards, for the implementation of which a certain criminal and procedural form is intended. The parameters of the substantive basis of criminal proceedings are set with the signs that shall be indicated in the Code of Criminal Procedure and may change. It directly refers to the expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling, by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code. Initially, it was assumed that the application of this procedure is permissible in criminal cases concerning crimes the punishment for which does not exceed 5 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code. The expedited court proceedings began to be applied in criminal cases concerning crimes, the punishment for which does not exceed 10 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code, since 2003. The Russian Supreme Court made an attempt to reduce the application of court proceedings provided by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code in 2019. It turned out to be successful. Legislators have changed the basic criterion that determines the substantive basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling. Now the system of categories of crimes is this basis. The system of categories of crimes presented in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is not stable enough and is based on a set of provisions of this Code, but the sanctions for many crimes are not scientifically and practically grounded in this Code. In addition, the classification of crimes enshrined in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is based on such a criterion as the nature and degree of public danger of the crime. These categories are among the most complex in the science of criminal law.Conclusions. The use of categories of crimes as a criterion for determining the criminal legal basis of the expedited procedure for making a court decision significantly complicates the application of the expedited procedure.

REVIEW OF CASES ON NEWLY OPENED AND NEW CIRCUMSTANCES: UNFA-VOURABLE DISTINCTIONS OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 105-114
Author(s):  
Alia R. Sharipova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The article deals with the comparative analysis of the procedure and grounds for reviewing court cases under new and newly discovered circumstances in criminal and arbitration, civil and administrative proceedings. The author proceeds from the idea of common fundamental beginnings of justice in general, and therefore, all types of judicial activities - including an extraordinary review of judicial decisions, which have entered into legal force. The branch specifics of specific procedural institutions should have a special explanation based on the specifics of the branch itself. The author thinks that there is no key basis for reviewing the case on the newly discovered circumstances in the criminal trial and attempts to replace it with one of the new circumstances. In this part, the current criminal procedure law differs unfavourably from the Soviet Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) of the RSFSR of 1960 - among the newly discovered circumstances, there are no those that could indicate a miscarriage of justice made out of direct connection with someone's criminal actions. In the current CPC of the Russian Federation, the list of newly discovered circumstances is closed, and the list of new circumstances that entail the review of the court decisions is, on the contrary, open. Examples of academic papers and administrative enactments justifying such a replacement are given. The author gives his arguments against it and proposes to change the list of grounds for revision, referring to the regulation in other procedural branches, historical and foreign experience. A significant procedural difference of the considered type of extraordinary review of cases in criminal proceedings from other types of proceedings is found. It is the need for applicants to request a review from the prosecutor, not from the court. The greatest objection is the non-alternative procedure: the prosecutor is a participant in the criminal proceedings on the part of the prosecution, he is responsible for the undoubted proof of the charge, which is the basis of the sentence, the abolition of which is requested by another interested person. The negative impact of the prosecutor's mediation between the complainant and the court on access to justice and its quality is argued. It is pointed out that there is no need for prosecutorial checks to resolve the issue of judicial review of the case. The analysis of judicial statistics in different branches of justice shows that criminal proceedings differ sharply by the negligible number of judicial review cases due to newly discovered and new circumstances. The article calls into question the ability to explain this fact by a higher quality of sentences in criminal cases in comparison with other court decisions in other court cases.

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document