Involvement As a Defendant In Criminal Proceedings: National Traditions vs Foreign Experience

Legal Concept ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 34-40
Author(s):  
Sergey Rossinsky ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Methodological Framework ◽  
Positive Experience ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Further Development

Introduction: the prospects for further development of the criminal procedure mechanism for making a criminal claim against a person that is subject to substantive resolution during subsequent court proceedings is one of the controversial issues that attract the attention of a wide range of specialists. In this regard, the purpose of the paper is to identify the historical reasons that predetermined the rooting in the Russian system of the criminal procedure regulation of the existing procedure for bringing as a defendant to understand the possibility of its reformation, following the example of other European states. Methods: the methodological framework for the research consists of the general scientific (dialectical, systemic, structural-functional, logical, etc.) and specific scientific (formal-legal, comparative-legal, historical-legal, prognostic, etc.) research methods. The results of the study made it possible to formulate a position on the conditionality of the existing mechanism for bringing as a defendant by the historical traditions of the Russian criminal justice that have been formed over many years, largely based on the “classical” French (investigative) model of pre-trial proceedings. Conclusions: any proposed reforms of the mechanism for making a criminal claim against a person cannot be started only because of the “positive” experience of other countries; they can only begin after identifying, understanding, and properly assessing the underlying reasons that predetermined the appearance of the procedure for bringing as a defendant in the Russian criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Participation of a Teacher and Psychologist in Criminal Procedure on Cases Against Minors

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 289-294
Author(s):  
L. Savelyeva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Status ◽  
A Minor

The criminal process in cases involving minors has its own peculiarities, which is explained by the need to ensure the rights of minors. At the same time, the current legislation does not always have a systemic character; a number of norms contradict each other. The specifics of Russian criminal justice in cases involving minors is a ground for discussion among scientists and practitioners. One of the controversial issues is the mechanism for ensuring the participation of a teacher and a psychologist in criminal proceedings in cases involving minors. The author concludes that the rules for the participation of a teacher or psychologist in criminal proceedings should not differ depending on the procedural status of a minor (accused, victim, witness). When considering the status of a teacher and a psychologist, the author comes to the conclusion that it is inexpedient to identify them. The teacher should be recognized as an independent participant in the process on the part of the defense, and it is advisable to consider the psychologist as a specialist.

Prospects for the Implementation of Special Conciliation Procedures in the Russian Criminal Process

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 99-104
Author(s):  
E. V. Markovicheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Traditional System ◽  
Common Features ◽  
Legal Method

In the 21st century, the concept of restorative justice has become widespread in criminal proceedings. The introduction of special compromise procedures into the criminal process allows for the restoration of the rights of the victim and reduces the level of repression in the criminal justice system. The traditional system of punishment is considered ineffective, not conducive to the purpose of compensating for harm caused by the crime. Restorative justice enables the accused to compensate for the harm caused by the crime and is oriented not towards their social isolation, but towards further positive socialization. The introduction of the ideas of restorative justice into the Russian criminal process requires the introduction of special conciliation procedures. The purpose of the article is to reveal promising directions for introducing special conciliation procedures into the Russian criminal process. The use of the formal legal method provided an analysis of the norms of criminal procedure legislation and the practice of its application. Comparative legal analysis revealed common features in the development of models of restorative justice in modern states. Conclusions. The introduction of conciliation procedures into the Russian criminal process is in line with the concept of its humanization and reduction of the level of criminal repression. The consolidation of the mediator»s procedural status and the mediation procedure in the criminal procedure legislation will make it possible to put into practice the elements of restorative justice.

Execution of a Sentence in the Structure of Criminal Proceedings: Procedural Stage or Special Court Proceedings?

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 97-106
Author(s):  
V. V. Nikolyuk ◽  
◽  
L. A. Pupysheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Self In Relation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Proceedings

The article analyzes the concept of execution of a sentence as an independent stage of the criminal process (the stage of criminal proceedings). Arguments are given that point to its certain illogicality and inconsistency. The authors on the basis of existing legislation and taking into account the positions of Plenum of the Supreme Court additionally reasoned and substantiated the thesis of the existence of the criminal process self in relation to a criminal case of criminal procedure, regulated by Chapter 47 of the Code of criminal procedure.

Analyzing Foundations of Imposing a Monetary Penalty on Parties to a Criminal Proceeding

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 682
Author(s):  
Arman SAKHARBAY ◽  
Askar Kadyrovich KALIYEV ◽  
Moldir Saparbekkyzy BAIKOMUROVA
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Regulatory Systems ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Original Approach

The research analyzes the possible application and effectiveness of a monetary penalty as one of the most useful sanctions to maintain the established order of criminal justice, as well as develops constructive proposals to improve the criminal procedure legislation based on the conducted survey. To this end, the authors of the article have studied the criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan and legislation on administrative offenses, considered scientific opinions presented in numerous publications on relevant topics and conducted a comparative analysis of regulatory systems in Kazakhstan, Germany, Austria, the USA and the UK. As a result, the authors have established that one of the main reasons hindering the adequate implementation of criminal justice is the violation of obligations to participate in criminal proceedings by persons named in the Criminal Procedure Code of Kazakhstan. To maintain procedural discipline, the court is provided with ample opportunities in the form of coercive measures, including a monetary penalty. The authors have investigated the legal nature of a monetary penalty and compared it with administrative fines. The authors have considered grounds and application procedures for this sanction in the criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan and some foreign legal systems. The authors have determined the problems of its implementation caused by the slovenly legislation of a monetary penalty that impedes law enforcement activity. A comprehensive analysis allows developing proposals for improving the use of monetary penalties as measures of coercion for criminal cases heard in the court. If these proposals are enshrined in the existing regulatory framework and put into practice, they will strengthen the discipline of parties to criminal proceedings, ensure the strict observance of criminal proceedings and increase their general effectiveness. Due to its conclusions and proposals, the article demonstrates the novelty of the conducted research, the authors' original approach to the analysis of information and innovative ways to improve the existing legislative framework.

scholarly journals Execution of a Sentence – an Independent Stage of Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 560-565
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav B. Shabanov ◽  
Lyudmila Yu. Budanova ◽  
Vladimir. P. Kramarenko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Essential Nature ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Characteristic Features

The article investigates how the notion “execution of a sentence” was formed and analyzes the content of the stage of execution of a sentence as an independent part of criminal procedure, examines legal issues of criminal proceedings within the stage of execution of a sentence, and puts forward some ways to improve it. The fact that court activities aimed at considering and resolving issues related to the execution of a sentence are defined as part of criminal procedure rather than as an independent stage is a subject for debate, because this activity may or may not take place. But we agree with those scholars who believe that the stage such as the presentation of a sentence for execution always emerges during sentencing, and the analogy with the stage of launching criminal investigation allows us to conclude that, that further criminal proceedings may occur several times or may not occur at all and thus form an independent stage of criminal procedure. We studied the opinions and statements of practitioners and scholars in the field of criminal procedure concerning the role and importance of criminal proceedings aimed at the execution of a sentence as an independent stage of criminal procedure, institution of criminal procedural law, a separate phase of criminal procedure and the theoretical arguments as to the essential nature and meaning of the execution of a sentence in criminal procedure. We conclude that criminal proceedings aimed at presenting the sentence for execution, consideration and resolution by the court of the issues related to its execution form the content of an independent stage of criminal procedure, which has all the necessary and characteristic features. Key words: execution of a sentence; stage of criminal procedure; subjects of execution of a sentence; criminal justice; criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Verbalisan Witness Position as Evidence of a Criminal Case

Ius Poenale ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-86
Author(s):  
M. Kemal Pasha Zahrie
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Justice Practice

The presence of Constitutional Court Decision Number 65/PUUVIII/2010 expands the meaning of witnesses in Article 1 point 26 of the KUHAP, resulting in the emergence of various interpretations in criminal justice practice concerning the position of verbal witness testimony as evidence. Juridically, the decision creates problems considering that the Criminal Procedure Code or Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) does not recognize verbal witnesses' testimony as evidence. This study examined the position and the strength of verbal witnesses' testimony as evidence in criminal proceedings. After gathering all the data using normative and empirical juridical research, this paper concludes that the testimony of verbal witnesses is grouped in the evidence of guidance in Article 188 Paragraph (1) of the KUHAP because the testimony of verbal witnesses is not primary evidence. After all, its existence is contingent on the judge's willingness to employ it. The strength of proof of testimony of verbal witnesses is that they must satisfy the elements of Article 188 paragraph (1) of the KUHAP, namely the information referred to in the form of events or circumstances concerning a criminal act, as well as conformity with other evidence, as required by Article 188 paragraph (2) of the KUHAP.

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.

scholarly journals Digital Information Platforms as an Object of Normative Legal Regulation in the Sphere of Criminal Proceedings

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 873-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viсtor Grigoryev ◽  
Alexander Sukhodolov ◽  
Sergey Ovanesyan ◽  
Marina Spasennikova ◽  
Vladislav Tyunkov
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
Road Map ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Definition Of

While noting the general trend for the regulation of digital relations in the sphere of criminal court proceedings, the authors draw attention to the absence of a common approach to this work, or of a universal understanding of criminal procedure norms regarding digital relations, as well as to the drawbacks in preparing new norms that regulate digital relations. Problems connected with the regulation of electronic processes are not specific for Russia only. Laws of some countries do not recognize evidence obtained electronically, and view it as secondary. The results of implementing the road map of digital economy and the approaches to the definition and typification of digital platforms are the basis for laying the foundations of the criminal proceedings’ digitization in Russia. Large-scale growth of innovations for the platforms and an increasing complexity of their architecture enable the solution of a new research task — the spread of digital platforms to various sectors, in this case, to the sphere of criminal proceedings. The authors use the definition of a digital platform approved by the Russian Governmental Commission on Digital Development to formulate their own definition of a digital information platform as an object of normative legal regulation in the sphere of criminal proceedings and prove that it should belong to sectoral digital platforms. The value of the transition to the normative legal regulation of digital information systems in the sphere of court proceedings lies in the reduction of costs and the elimination of the subjective factor by using a package of digital technologies of data processing and changing the system of the division of labor while reaching the purpose of criminal justice. The authors also stress the inappropriateness of simplification and primitivism, when a criminal procedure system is mechanically viewed as a system of distributed registers (blockchain), or when digitization is used as an excuse for suggesting the abolishment of investigative departments as parasites in the digital reality where crime investigation and solution become a job for ordinary internet users.

scholarly journals Institute of Returning a Criminal Case to the Prosecutor in the System of Criminally-Remedial Means, Ensuring the Victim's Right to Protection from Crime and Access to Justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 512-526
Author(s):  
Tatyana Ryabinina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Criminal Justice Process

The article deals with current and controversial issue in the criminal science, specifically the need for the Russian criminal justice process to have an institute to return a criminal case to the procurator at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court hearing. The author emphasizes that during the continuance of RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure, a special emphasis was put on it as a guarantee of the delivery of justice and the rights of the participants in the proceedings, that put in place the arrangements necessary for an effective court trial. The goal of modern judicial reform is to establish an independent judiciary whose main function is the delivery of justice which can be implemented in criminal proceedings only in adversary criminal proceedings. Since the beginning of its implementation, attitudes towards the institution of returning a criminal case by a court to a procurator to correct lacunae, loopholes, contradictions, irregularities or flaws in pre-trial proceedings have changed dramatically. It is perceived as an attribute of the courts prosecutorial activities, which is inconsistent with its new role as an independent body to resolve legal disputes between a state and an individual awaiting for a founded and equitable decision from the court. Despite critical rhetoric towards the institution of returning the criminal case to the prosecutor, the author argues that it is necessary due to specific status of the first judicial phase in a staged system of Russian criminal justice process. This institute creates conditions for monitoring and verification activities of judges at this stage, and the corresponding authority of judges to determine the future course of criminal cases brought before the courts. However, the author concludes that the task of rectifying the shortcomings of the prosecution can be addressed at the preliminary hearing introduced by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to resolve various contentious issues. When it is impossible to remove the obstacles that prevent the court from conducting a trial, the judge may, taking into account the views of the parties, decide to return the case to the prosecutor.

Specific Features of Criminal Proceeding Regarding Criminal Misdemeanours

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viacheslav V Vapniarchuk ◽  
Inna L Bespalko ◽  
Maryna G Motoryhina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Proper Understanding ◽  
Basic Approach ◽  
Criminal Proceeding ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Court Proceedings

Abstract The urgency of the problem stated in the article is conditioned by amendments to the criminal procedural legislation, which in a new way regulate the procedure of criminal proceedings concerning criminal offences. The aim of the article is to investigate the procedure for conducting criminal proceedings for criminal offences and to make suggestions for improving its regulatory framework. The basic approach to the study of this problem was to conduct a critical analysis of the rules of the current criminal procedural legislation, which regulate criminal proceedings for criminal offences, and to express views on rules’ proper understanding and application. Based on the analysis of the features of the normative regulation of criminal proceedings concerning criminal offences, the publication comments on a number of norms of the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which regulate both pre-trial investigation of criminal offences in the form of enquiries and court proceedings against them; approaches to their elimination have been proposed. The materials of the article represent both theoretical and practical values. They can be used for further scientific investigation of the features of criminal proceedings regarding criminal offences, as well as for the proper understanding and implementation of law enforcement criminal proceedings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document