May the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation concerning criminal court proceedings serve as judicial precedents?

2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-133
Author(s):  
Ираида Смолькова ◽  
Павел Преловский
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings

scholarly journals Hearing in a judicial investigation of a juror and an investigator: is an analogy possible

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 64-67
Author(s):  
V.V. Kalnitsky ◽  
◽  
T.I. Salnikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Essential Difference ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Investigation ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
New Interpretation ◽  
Court Of Appeal

The legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which allows the possibility of questioning jurors in the court of appeal without granting them the procedural status of a witness and on a limited subject, is considered. This position is assessed as a turning point, radically changing the vector of relations to judges (even if they are not professional) — from the normatively conducted presumption of their honesty, which excludes all interviews of judges on any emerging occasions, to the possibility of checking the legality of the organization of jury discussion of the verdict, in particular, hearing them on this issue by the court of appeal. The question is raised about the significance of the new interpretation of part 3 of article 56 of the Сode of Criminal Procedure of Russian Federation for resolving the problem of participation in court proceedings of other powerful subjects of criminal proceedings who performed their function at the previous stages of criminal proceedings, for example, the investigator. The conclusion is made about the essential difference between these situations. At the same time, the article shows that certain nuances of the long-standing discussion about the position of the interrogated investigator can be clarified.

Features of Judicial Practice in the Russia as the Basis of Precedent

2020 ◽  
pp. 98-106
Author(s):  
V. V. Levin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Making

The article is devoted to the analysis of judicial practice as the basis of law-making activity in the Russian Federation, on the basis of which it is possible to create a precedent. Case law in Russia is Advisory in nature and is not mandatory for law enforcement practice. Courts use the signs of case law in their decisions in the reasoned part. Signs of case law is a ruling of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation and regulations of the armed forces of the Russian Federation.

Emergency powers of the authorities of the constituent units of the federation (states) in Russia, the USA and Brazil amid the spread of a new coronavirus infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-107
Author(s):  
Alexander Merkulenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Emergency Powers ◽  
Lack Of Control ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government

Due to the new coronavirus pandemic, high alert regimes were introduced across the Russian Federation in spring 2020. These emergency regimes were established exclusively by the state bodies of the Russian Federation’s constituent units – federal authorities did not introduce their own emergency regimes. This decentralized strategy of fighting the pandemic was also introduced by the USA and Brazil. Their states, without the sanction of the federal government, and in the case of Brazil, ignoring its bans, set emergency restrictions similar to those in Russia. The legal regulation of emergency regimes existed before 2020, when constituent units of the federation (states) actively used their emergency powers. However, the regimes introduced during the fight against the pandemic were slightly different to previous ones. The restrictions on rights and freedoms within these regimes were so severe that not only their proportionality was questioned, but there were also doubts as to whether the regional level of the government had the authority to establish such strict restrictions. In addition, the pandemic exposed old problems and revealed new shortcomings in the legal regulation of emergency regimes: lack of control over the realization of the emergency regime by legislative (representative) authorities, and gaps in legislative regulation – notably in the establishment of possible restrictions and of a mechanism for scrutinizing their proportionality. All this raised questions about the proportionality of the established restrictions. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolved a very insignificant amount of the problems. While the United States and Brazil faced similar issues, the practice of scrutinizing implemented restrictions in these countries was more common. This article takes domestic and foreign experiences into account, while examining certain aspects of the establishment and the operation of regional emergency regimes.

Legal restrictions on the right of association in political parties and their interpretation in court decisions: comparative legal analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-179
Author(s):  
Andrey Vershinin
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Party System ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Political Competition ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation

The article examines the issue of exercising the freedom of association in political parties in Russia in a comparative analysis with the leading democratic countries of the world. Modern democracies cannot be imagined without political parties, which are the representors of the interests of their voters in legislative bodies and local government bodies. The development of civil society and the entire political system in the country depends on how the freedom of association in political parties and the access of parties to participate in elections is realized. The development of legislation on political parties in the Russian Federation proceeded unevenly. In the first years after the adoption of the Constitution the legislative body did not introduce strict requirements for parties. The adoption of a special federal law on political parties in 2001 became a turning point in the development of the party system. The author identifies two large blocks of restrictions on the creation of parties. The first is legislative restrictions, the second is the restrictions that arise from the unfair activities of legislative and law enforcement agencies. In this work, legislative restrictions are compared with restrictions in other democracies, as well as based on legal positions developed by the European Court of Human Rights. The author comes to the opinion that some restrictions on the creation of parties are not necessary now, in the meantime they significantly narrow the possibilities of party creation and political competition. First, we are talking about a ban on the creation of regional parties. The Constitutional Court in its legal positions indicated that this restriction is temporary and will be lifted over time. Within the framework of this work, the author will give suggestions on changing the approach to the creation of political parties in Russia, which should affect the emergence of new strong parties at different levels of public authority. The author believes that a system of “controlled multiparty system” has developed in Russia, which is implemented both in changing the legislation on political parties based on the interests of the “party in power” and the practice of the registration body, which prevents the formation of new parties claiming to redistribute the existing distribution of forces. Based on the analysis of the legislation on political parties, law enforcement practice, decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the ECHR and the legislation of foreign countries, the author proposes approaches to reforming the existing party system, which include small cosmetic changes and large-scale changes in approaches to the creation of parties.

Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 2020 and the Content of Court Proceedings

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-12
Author(s):  
Latysheva N. A. ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Organizational Support ◽  
National Language ◽  
Record Keeping ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings

Judicial record-keeping, which in its content refers to judicial activity of a security, auxiliary nature, received an impetus for its development in connection with the amendments to the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation that entered into force on July 4, 2020. The introduction of innovations, which will take place through the organizational, guiding activities of the bodies of the judicial community – the Council of Judges of the Russian Federation and the bodies of the judicial community in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the improvement of regulatory regulation by authorized entities will allow realizing the needs of society in a new quality of relations between the judiciary and citizens of the Russian Federation. The article substantively defines the problems of the development of normative regulation in the course of ensuring arbitration proceedings, organizing constitutional and legal judicial statistics, exercising the rights of citizens to use the national language in the process of conducting judicial proceedings. In connection with the findings, options are proposed for generating ideas in the field of organizational support of justice.

scholarly journals Problems of Ensuring a Fair and Cost-Effective Balance of Interests of the Parties to an Employment Contract in the Development of Atypical Employment (Based on the Analysis of the Norms of Chapter 53.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation)

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 148-158
Author(s):  
N. V. Chernykh
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Employment Contract ◽  
Balance Of Interests ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Atypical Employment ◽  
Further Development

The paper analyzes the problems of ensuring a fair and cost-effective balance of interests of the parties to an employment contract in the development of various forms of atypical employment, including those revealed through the analysis of the norms on the provision of labor to employees (personnel). There are gaps in the legislation regarding the equal level of remuneration of transferred employees in comparison with the regular staff of the receiving party; the lack of opportunities to participate in collective-contractual setting of working conditions; inability to implement the employee’s right to training and additional professional education. The author examines the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation expressed in the decision of 19.05.2020 No. 25-P "On constitutionality test of Art. 59 part 1 para. 8 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of I. A. Sysoev" regarding the conclusion of a fixed-term contract with transferred to other employers’ workers. The author concludes that the norms of Chapter 53.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation do not provide a fair and cost-effective balance of interests of the parties to the employment contract in the development of atypical employment. They may seem effective and useful to employers who use their own employees’ labor to minimize staff costs, but this efficiency is imaginary as it is based on short-term benefits and savings on the development of the organization in the future. In this regard, further development of both legislation and law enforcement practice should be based on ensuring a truly equal status of the regular employees and employees engaged by the employer under the contract for the provision of labor to employees (personnel). In the course of the research, the need to make changes to the Labor Code of the Russian Federation is justified.

scholarly journals TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE CONCEPT «PROCEDURAL COSTS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS»

Issues of Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 89-93
Author(s):  
S.M. Darovskikh ◽  
◽  
Z.V Makarova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Procedural Costs ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Article 5

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.

scholarly journals Genesis of establishment and development of the judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries: institutional and normative characteristics

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-36
Author(s):  
Valentina Mikhailovna Bol'shakova
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject of this research is the evolution of the structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries. Description is given to the changes undergone by the Russian judicial system after dissolution of the Soviet Union. The author follows the dynamics of the normative legal changes that regulate judicial proceedings, as well as reveals the institutional framework of the modern structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation. The article illustrates the institutional and normative changes within the structure of judicial system of the Russian Federation in the late XX – early XXI centuries based on application of the comparative-legal and systemic methods of research. The novelty and the main conclusions lie in the following: it is established that the Russian Federation has issued the normative legal acts that contribute to the strengthening and unification of the Russian judicial system, uniformity of social guarantees and compensations set for judges. Currently, the judicial system of the Russian Federation is founded on the principle of combining administrative-territorial and district organization. It is determined that the judicial system of the Russian Federation consists of 1) the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; 2) the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation; 3) federal courts of general jurisdiction; 4) arbitration courts; 5) magistrates’ courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. It is noted that since January 1, 2023, the Constitutional (statutory) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation will be abolished.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document