scholarly journals Abuse of Rights, Its Prevention and Suppression in Russian Criminal Process: Some Research Results

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 914-924
Author(s):  
Olga Andreeva ◽  
Viktor Grigoryev ◽  
Oleg Zaytsev ◽  
Tatiana Trubnikova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

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 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 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Positive Influence ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Maximum Period ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Activity ◽  
Legal Uncertainty

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

scholarly journals Goals and Tasks (Purpose) of Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 386-393
Author(s):  
Kirill Naumov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Goal Setting ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

The relevance of the problem covered is explained by the essence of goal-setting of any activity, which determines its final result and procedural structure. The direction of actions of state bodies in responding to crimes depends on it, as well as the arsenal of means provided for this to the law enforcement officer. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not have a norm directly formulating the goal and objectives of criminal judicial proceedings. The legislator has applied such a non-standard category as “purpose”, which replaced the customary provisions that existed for more than 40 years on the tasks of criminal proceedings, enshrined in the previously existing code. Since the procedural law does not name the goals and objectives of the criminal process, the analysis of the target settings of modern criminal justice, the essence of the categories “purpose”, “goal”, “task”, their correlation and meaning is of particular importance. The Author analyzes the points of view of the processors of the pre-revolutionary and modern periods. The conclusion about the differentiation of the given concepts is made. Unlike the views of most scholars, the Author believes that purpose and goal are identical concepts, since they determine the final result of procedural activities. The goal is seen as the end result of the activity, and the task is determined by the goal and is considered as the result of its separate stage. Therefore, the Author conditionally correlates these categories as general (goal) and particular (task). There can be many tasks, and they are subject to changes under certain conditions, and the goal is always the same. The goal of any criminal process is determined by the need to streamline the dispute between the parties arising from the crime committed. The absence of clearly formulated elements of goal-setting prevents the assessment of the effectiveness of activities to resolve a criminal-legal conflict. The flaws in the legal structure of teleological norms of the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are noted. On the basis of a comparison of the views of procedural scholars, analysis of regulatory legal acts, the author came to the conclusion that the result of the criminal process should be the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals, organizations, society and the state from criminal encroachments; protection of the individual from illegal and unjustified accusations, convictions, restrictions on his rights and freedoms. The tasks, despite their uncertainty from the point of view of legal regulation, constitute an established formula: quick and complete disclosure of a crime, the appointment of a just punishment to the guilty, education and prevention. The Author believes that the current structure of norms on the appointment of criminal proceedings does not reflect the absolute need to protect the interests of society and the state, and also does not define specific tasks as a guideline for the law enforcement officer to fulfill them in each criminal case in order to achieve this goal. Therefore, we propose our own legal structure of the norm on the tasks of legal proceedings, complementing the current provisions.

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.

Specifics of some anti-corruption measures in Russia within the framework of public and state security

2020 ◽  
pp. 541-547
Author(s):  
Tatyana Plotnikova ◽  
Andrey Paramonov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
State Security ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Illegal Acts ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

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.

scholarly journals The subject of judicial control in consideration of complaints: controversial issues of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

scholarly journals Grounds for Canceling Seizure in Pre-Trial Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 228-233
Author(s):  
Boris B. Bulatov ◽  
◽  
Alexander S. Dezhnev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Lawsuits ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

scholarly journals APPLICATION OF SAFETY MEASURES TO PARTICIPANTS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS ON THE PART OF THE DEFENCE

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 823-829
Author(s):  
F.F. Zaripov
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Separate Group ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Safety Measures ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Rights And Interests

The article formulates the problems of procedural regulation of ensuring the safety of participants in criminal proceedings on the part of the defense in the process of criminal proceedings. It is noted that despite the hasty division of the participants in the criminal process into groups in accordance with the procedural function performed by them, the need to separate the participants in criminal proceedings standing upon the interests of the defense into a separate group is not disputed. Attention is drawn to the fact that the principle of protecting the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in criminal proceedings does not fully regulate the adoption of appropriate measures to ensure the safety of participants in the criminal process for the realization of their rights and interests. The necessity of making amendments and additions to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (as the main source of criminal procedure law), as well as a number of other legislative acts related to the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms and to ensuring the safety of participants in criminal proceedings in all areas, is substantiated.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL CAPACITY OF JUVENILE SUSPECTS AND ACCUSED

2019 ◽  
pp. 34-36
Author(s):  
A.I. Teregulova ◽  
E.V. Yezhova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Representative ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Juvenile Suspects

The article deals with the issue of criminal procedural capacity of juvenile suspects, accused. The conclusion is made about the expediency of introducing into the scientific circulation the concepts of “criminal procedure capacity”, “partial criminal procedure capacity”. Based on the study of doctrinal sources, law enforcement practice, the authors come to the conclusion that at the legislative level it is necessary to provide for the termination of the powers of such participants in the criminal process as a legal representative, teacher (psychologist), if the suspect or accused person is under 18 years old. A draft amendment to Part 3 of Art. 420 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document