scholarly journals Problems of Implementing Standards for the Prevention of Secondary Victimization of Crime Victims in Ukrainian Criminal Procedure Legislation

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 927-936
Author(s):  
Natalia Hlynskaia ◽  
Olha Shylo ◽  
Olena Verkhoglyad-Herasimenko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Crime Victims ◽  
General Mechanism ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Secondary Victimization ◽  
Definition Of

Criminal procedure standards of preventing secondary victimization are examined through the prism of European documents of advisory nature that contain a number of regulations that establish minimum standards of the rights of victims and the duties of the state to protect them. The authors prove a vital role that criminal procedure legislation plays in the general mechanism of preventing such a negative phenomenon as secondary victimization of a crime victim. Taking into consideration the etymological characteristics of the concept of «standard», the authors formulate a definition of standards for preventing secondary victimization of crime victims and determine their system. It consists of an aggregate of interconnected elements: the state’s compensation to a victim for damage caused by the crime; provision of access to justice for victims and the use of criminal proceedings that are unburdensome for the victims; provision of an opportunity for the victim to actively participate in criminal proceedings; provision of legal, psychological, medical and social help to the victim; guarantee of a right to safety for the victim and their family members; a system of extra guarantees of the rights and interests of vulnerable victims. The article also highlights key discrepancies between Ukrainian legislation and some of the above-mentioned standards and presents ideas on eliminating them. Specifically, the authors pay attention to the necessity of creating a Foundation for the protection of the rights of crime victims, whose main purpose would be the compensation of damages to the victims. As for the use of unburdensome criminal procedures, it is suggested that the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine should include a norm that states that the involvement of a victim in investigation activities that infringe on their rights and lawful interests should be kept to a minimum and should only be carried out when it is necessary for criminal proceedings. It is noted that normative regulation of the time frame for criminal proceedings at their specific stages should be regulated. Besides, there is a necessity for statutory determination of a general prohibition to disclose information on victims of certain types of crimes that would make it possible to identify the victim, etc.

scholarly journals TO THE QUESTION OF ACCESSORIES OF JUDICIAL EXAMINATION TO INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONS

2019 ◽  
pp. 58-68
Author(s):  
I. Pyrih
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Forensic Examination ◽  
Preparatory Stage ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Characteristic Features ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Selection Of

The article deals with problematic issues related to the norms of criminal procedure legislation, considering the involvement of an expert as an investigative action. Among criminal scientists and proceduralists there is no consensus on the procedural definition of forensic examination. Most of them include forensics to investigative actions. By the definition of a forensic examination, it is clear that an integral feature of a procedural action is to conduct it exclusively by officials of state bodies authorized by law to conduct criminal proceedings. These include: employees of the operational units, an investigator, a prosecutor, a judge. The subject of the examination is an expert – a person not authorized by law to conduct investigative actions. That is why, in our opinion, it is impossible to refer an examination to investigative actions. Proponents of referring a forensic examination to investigative actions most often mean it as «the appointment and conduct of a forensic examination». It is argued that actions regarding the appointment and conduct of the examination are different in nature and subjects of conduct. If we consider the stage of appointment of the examination, and for the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine – the involvement of an expert, then its subject is the investigator. The subject of the examination is an expert. Considering the characteristic features of the investigative action, it can be concluded that the stage of appointment of the examination or the involvement of an expert, which scientists consider as preparatory to the examination, has all the signs inherent in an independent investigative action. It is governed by the rules of procedural law, carried out in the framework of criminal proceedings, authorized by the person. When an expert is involved, the investigator conducts certain actions, the result of which is reflected in the ruling of the investigating judge. The purpose of the examination is to obtain, research and verify evidence. Considering the involvement of an expert as a separate investigative action, we define its content, divided into generally accepted stages: preparatory, working and final. To the preparatory stage, we include such actions: the decision to conduct an examination; selection of an expert institution or a private expert; determination of the type of examination and subject of study; determining the order of appointment of examinations in relation to the same objects; timing of appointment examination. The following should be attributed to the working stage: selection of objects for examination; receipt of the decision of the investigating judge for the examination. The final stage consists of the following stages: determining the circle of persons who may be present during the examination; referrals and necessary materials to the expert institution. Key words: investigative (search) action, forensic examination, appointment of expertise, involvement of an expert.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The article is turned out to a scientific search for the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or accused" through the study of the essence of reconciliation and role in criminal proceedings thereof. The author notes that criminal procedural law (until 2012) had been proclaimed another approach to reconciliation between victim and suspect, not involved a dispute procedure as a conflict, the result of which can be reached by compromise and understanding through reconciliation. It is stated that one of the ways to resolve the legal conflict in committing a criminal offense was the opportunity to reach a compromise between the victim and the suspect (the accused) by concluding a reconciliation agreement between them, provided by the Code of Сriminal Procedure of Ukraine (2012). The main attention is placed on the shortcoming of the domestic criminal procedure law which is the lack of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or the accused", which can be eliminated only through examining the essence or legal nature of reconciliation in criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the current legislation and modern views on the institution of reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the author's definition of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement" is proposed. Thus, “The conciliation agreement is an agreement in criminal proceedings concluded between the victim and the suspect or the accused person on their own initiative in relation to crimes of minor or medium gravity and in criminal proceedings in the form of private prosecution, the subject of which is the compensation of harm caused by wrongdoing or committing other actions not related to compensation for the damage that the suspect or the accused is obliged to commit in favor of the victim, in exchange for an agreed punishment and sentencing thereof or sentencing thereof and relief from serving a sentence with probation, as well as the statutory consequences of conclusion and approval of the agreement".

Process of detention in Ukrainian criminal procedure

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 216-222
Author(s):  
Dariya Lazareva ◽  
Nataliia Reztsova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Research Paper ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Immediate Response

This research paper presents the analysis of essential characteristics of the detention process by an authorized official as an institution of criminal procedure. The author's definition of the concept of detention by an authorized official has been formulated. The authors have proposed to consider the use of this measure to ensure criminal proceedings as a form of proper and immediate response by authorized officials to the discovery of a crime and obtaining primary information that allows to reasonably suspect a person in its commission.

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.

POWERS OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE IN A JURY TRIAL IN THE CONTEXT OF ADVERSARIAL PRINCIPLES OF RUSSIAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

2021 ◽  
pp. 64-76
Author(s):  
Tatyana K. Ryabinina ◽  
◽  
Daria O. Chistilina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Jury Trials ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Individual

The main objective is to examine the powers of the presiding judge in jury trials in the context of adversarial principles of criminal proceedings. Particular attention will be paid by the authors to different approaches to the notion of adversariality and the definition of the role of a professional judge in such courts, as well as the degree of his activity during the judicial investigation. The main methods used by the authors were dialectical and systematic method, analysis, synthesis, as well as special legal methods of knowledge. The outcome of the research will be a definition of the role of the presiding judge in a jury trial. Forms of criminal procedure that allow the individual to directly participate in the deci-sion-making process of the judiciary are responsible for ensuring citizen participation in the administration of justice in the state. Two such forms have been developed in the world practice so far: the classical jury trial model and the Scheffen model. Each of them provides certain (broad or narrow) powers of a professional judge, the scope of which determines the degree of independence of citizens and the ultimate prospects for the development of a system of popular democratic justice in an adversarial system of criminal proceedings. In today's Russia, the classical jury trial model, modeled after the English jury trial, does not provide for broad powers of the court. In addition, there is the adversarial principle in Russia, which is fostered by the existence of jury trials. However, strict adherence to its provisions may lead to a misunderstanding of the role of the presiding judge in such a court. The activity of a professional judge should be balanced in accordance with the needs of the criminal case under consideration. Thus, requesting additional evidence in the course of the trial in order to verify existing evidence should not be considered a violation of the adversarial principle. Thus, the development of the optimal model for jury trial functioning as well as the determination of the presiding judge's role in the context of adversarial principles of criminal proceedings is a socially-systemic task. It requires a comprehensive dogmatic, comparative-legal and political-legal approach in order to develop the jury trial model which is more con-sistent with the legal system of the state.

scholarly journals Research on the Rules of Electronic Evidence in Chinese Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 111-121
Author(s):  
Jin Du ◽  
Liping Ding ◽  
Guangxuan Chen
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
State Power ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Definition Of

As a new object in judicial practice, electronic evidence is of great practical significance. To locate the probative force of electronic evidence, which can be used to prove the facts of the crime, judging the electronic evidence validity, and how to establish scientific rules of electronic evidence, which not only effectively contains crime, but also protects civil rights from illegal infringement of state power becomes very important. This article outlines the definition of electronic evidence and rules and establishes a suitable electronic evidence system of China's criminal procedure system based on the analysis of problems in each link of judicial proof in judicial practice and the four aspects of judicial proof.

scholarly journals ДЕЯКІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТИМЧАСОВОГО ВИЛУЧЕННЯ ТА АРЕШТУ МАЙНА ЯК ЗАХОДІВ ЗАБЕЗПЕЧЕННЯ КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОВАДЖЕННЯ

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 520-528
Author(s):  
І. В. Гловюк
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

Стаття присвячена дослідженню проблемних питань застосування тимчасового вилу­чення майна та арешту майна як заходів забезпечення кримінального провадження із урахуванням наявної судової практики. Указано та обґрунтовано некоректність норма­тивного визначення тимчасового вилучення майна. Відмічено прогальність нормативного визначення арешту майна в аспекті об'єктів, на які може бути накладено арешт. Сфор­мульовано пропозиції щодо внесення змін та доповнень до ч. 1 ст. 167 КПК щодо ви­значення поняття «тимчасове вилучення майна» та ч. 1 ст. 170 КПК щодо осіб, на майно яких може бути накладено арешт.   The article is dedicated to the research of problematic issues of exercise of temporary seizure of property and arrest of property as means for ensuring criminal proceedings considering relevant judicial practices. Author mentioned and justified his point of view regarding incorrectness of the normative definition of seizure. Author also indicated whitespaces of the regulatory definition of arrest of property in the aspect of objects that may be the subject for the arrest. Proposals for amendments and additions to the part 1 of the Art. 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the definition of «temporary seizure of property» and part 1 of the Art. 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the scope of persons whose property may be arrested have been made.

scholarly journals The Doctrine of Erroneous Judgment and the Modern Theory of Miscarriages of Justice in Germany: General Characteristics and Their Significance for Establishing the Truth in German Criminal Proceedings

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 104-110
Author(s):  
A.G. Trofimik ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Modern Theory ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Concept Of Truth ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Russian Research ◽  
Miscarriage Of Justice

The research of the German criminal process reveals the main theoretical characteristics of theory of miscarriages of justice in German criminal procedure. The essential aspects of the doctrine of erroneous judgment are established. The conclusion about the significance of the doctrine of erroneous judgment for the modern theory of miscarriages of justice in Germany is formulated. Based on a comprehensive research of original German sources, the main provisions of the doctrine of erroneous judgment and the modern theory of miscarriages of justice in Germany are enunciated. The influence of discursive philosophy on theoretical ideas about criminal proceedings is established. The immediate practical applicability of these theories is rather low. In the author’s opinion, their importance, among other things, is that the problematics of miscarriages of justice in Germany are closely related to the concept of truth in criminal proceedings, which is uncharacteristically of Russian research in the designated area. Based on the analysis of German doctrine, the significance of theoretical provisions for establishing the truth in a criminal procedure is determined. A pragmatic, utilitarian German approach to the legislative formulation of truth in criminal proceedings is represented. The legislative recognition and interpretation of the truth in criminal proceedings are expressed. The correlation between the theoretical provisions on material truth and the theory of miscarriages of justice is confirmed. As the result of the research the functional meaning of truth for the theory and practice of criminal proceedings in Germany is enunciated. In addition, the German theoretic definition of the concept of «miscarriage of justice» is given. Characteristic of this concept are identified. The significance of the scientific conclusions of this article consists in determining the fundamental suitability of German dogma and theory for a comparative legal research of miscarriages of justice in Russia and Germany.

scholarly journals Criminal procedure principles in defendant hearing

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Željko Mirkov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Crucial Issue ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Party Control ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Uniform Definition ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Although there is no uniform definition of procedural principles in criminal procedure theory, they can be defined as legal rules or guidelines on which the criminal proceedings are based. As such, the principles of criminal procedure law apply to procedural entities and procedural actions. Evidentiary actions, as a type of procedural action, clarify the criminal case that is the subject of the criminal proceedings. The Criminal Procedure Code stipulates several evidentiary actions, one of which is the preliminary hearing of the defendant. The defendant hearing, in which the defendant gives their testimony, is given a great deal of attention because it represents one of the most important pieces of evidence, and the course of evidence presentation is the most significant and crucial issue of the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the paper will present a review of the criminal procedure principles related to this evidentiary action, starting from the principle of legality as the main principle, followed by the principles of orality, publicity, immediacy and adversity (party control of facts and means of proof).

scholarly journals Dispositivity principle in the criminal procedure of Azerbaijan Republic: concept and application in individual rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 504-520
Author(s):  
Gahraman V. Jafarov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
The Will ◽  
Main Determinants ◽  
Procedural Rights

Unlike other principles of criminal procedure (such as legality, presumption of innocence, etc.), the principle of dispositivity (the principle of autonomy of the will of a participant in the proceedings) does not have an independent legal formula, enshrined in a separate article in the current criminal procedure legislation of Azerbaijan. In this regard, questions about the existence, concept, content, individual elements, manifestations, and scope of the principle are becoming relevant and at the same time highly disputable. The author aims to determine the essence of dispositivity, to consider its individual manifestations, as well as to develop scientifically sound recommendations for optimizing the application in practice of the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure in regulating issues related to the dispositive basis of the criminal process. The set goals predetermined solution for such basic issues as study of the philosophical and legal concept of dispositivity; determination of determinants-manifestations of dispositivity in criminal proceedings as a whole; recognition of dispositivity as one of the autonomous principles of the modern criminal process of Azerbaijan. The study was conducted by methods of dialectical cognition based on the principles of reflection, comprehensiveness, unity of induction and deduction, determinism, contradiction, and unity of analysis and synthesis. The author has studied and summarized a great deal of doctrinal material and jurisprudence, and some selected judicial acts have been used as real models for casuistry of the issues addressed in the article. As a result of the study, the author substantiates that, despite the absence of an independent article in the CPC on this principle, dispositivity is an autonomous principle of criminal procedure, not covered by other principles; on the contrary, it enters into various correlative relations with them. In other words, the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide a binding feature of the principle of criminal procedure. As the main determinants of the principle under study, the author proposes to consider a system of procedural rights of non-governmental participants in the proceedings that have the effect of initiating some kind of proceedings, and the consent of a participant category, which is a mandatory condition in the procedural decision-making mechanism of entities with power.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document