scholarly journals Can the Fight Against Crime Act as a Paradigm for the Legal Model of the Prosecutor's Activity?

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 613-623
Author(s):  
Nina Manova ◽  
Anna Churikova ◽  
Iraida Smolkova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Public ◽  
Life Model ◽  
Legal Model ◽  
The Russian Federation

The prosecutor plays a special role in counteracting crime, being the public officer whom the state made responsible for coordinating the activities of all law enforcement bodies, as well as for the legality and validity of criminal prosecution against persons who committed crimes. Today, alongside the legal model of the prosecutor’s activity provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation according to which the prosecutor performs the function of criminal prosecution nominally and is, in fact, removed from the participation in the pre-trial stages of the criminal process, there has also developed a rather autonomous real-life model of the prosecutor’s activities. In practice, the prosecutor still has an opportunity to influence the decisions regarding the initiation of a criminal case and indictment at the stage of preliminary investigation. The study of a prosecutor’s participation in the pre-trial proceedings, a survey of prosecutors, investigators and inquiry offices made it possible to conclude that rights and legal interests of the participants in the process are often sacrificed for the sake of indicators of the effectiveness of criminal prosecution and crime solving rates. The authors analyze the causes of this situation and reveal the drawbacks in the current normative model of the prosecutor’s activity. This analysis allowed them to conclude that there should be no conflict between such determinants of a prosecutor’s activity as counteracting crime and ensuring the rights of the participants of criminal proceedings if the legal model of the prosecutor’s activity is well-considered and carefully drawn. The lawmakers should see their task in finding a reasonable and clear balance between the abovementioned values; the absence of such a balance will inevitably result in a repressive approach to crime counteraction, which is absolutely unacceptable for the modern legal state. The authors describe the factors which, if taken into account, will make it possible to eliminate key problems of the legal model of the prosecutor’s work as well as the distortions and errors in its enforcement. They make a number of suggestions aimed at designing a model of the prosecutor’s activities that would contribute to effective crime counteraction without violations against rights and legal interests of persons in the sphere of criminal proceedings.

STATE ACCUSER’S WAIVER OF PROSECUTION

2021 ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
V. V. Stelmakh ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Social Orientation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Public ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Prior Consent ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Russian Federation

The current Russian criminal procedural law provides the possibility of the state accuser’s waiver to handle the prosecution, which entails a mandatory cessation of criminal proceedings. However, some procedural aspects of the refusal to hold the charge are not fully regulated, which causes difficulties in law enforcement practice. The paper briefly analyses the legality of introducing compromise principles into criminal proceedings since the refusal to prosecute is often interpreted as a particular case of compromise. The author argues that concord is suitable for activity based on dispositivity and particular principles (civil proceedings), though cannot be a driving force of criminal proceedings of the public legal nature aimed at achieving the truth about the circumstances of a crime committed. The paper considers the possibility, within the framework of the current legislation, to prevent an unreasonable decision of the refusal to hold the charge. The author analyzes the ability of a victim to refer to the superior public procurator as well as to implement the criminal prosecution independently. The paper states that the current law in terms of the regulation of waiver of prosecution does not fully correspond to the purpose and social orientation of criminal proceedings. In this regard, the author analyzes the by-laws of the General Procurator of the Russian Federation arranging this procedure and providing for the necessity for prior consent of a procurator who approved the indictment. The paper concludes that the law needs to be adjusted to optimize the regulation of the waiver of prosecution and formulates concrete proposals.

scholarly journals HYPERBOLIZATIONOF THE ACT OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AS A NEGATIVE FACTOR TO THE REALIZATION OF A STAGE OF A CRIMINAL CASE

Issues of Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-112
Author(s):  
L. L. Abramova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Initiation Stage ◽  
Formal Procedures

In the article, the author returns to the discussion of the need to formalize an act on the initiation of a new criminal case on the grounds of an additional detected crime or a newly established person during the investigation of the “main” case. Based on the analysis of law enforcement practice, the inefficiency of the current procedural mechanism for initiating criminal proceedings when a number of formal procedures are performed is demonstrated. The content of the article consistently analyzes the legal positions of the Supreme and constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation, the provisions of retrospective and current criminal procedure legislation, certain aspects of departmentalregulation, the opinions of authoritative scientists, and the positions of practitioners. Based on these arguments, the thesis is formulated that the reasons for this situation have developed historically and are due to the hyperbolization of the meaning of the act on the beginning of a preliminary investigation in modern legislation and law enforcement practice. This has an extremely negative impact on the effectiveness of criminal proceedings in General, and does not contribute to the implementation of the tasks of the criminal case initiation stage in particular. The author focuses on the fact that the institution of criminal proceedings and criminal prosecution should not be equated. The decision to initiate a criminal case may contain an initial, hypothetical qualification of the committed act, which should not create obstacles to the” testing “ of a person in one proceeding for involvement in the Commission of several similar acts and subsequently the presentation of a single charge in one case.

scholarly journals The Role of the Prosecutor in Coordinating the Activities of the Bodies of Inquiry and Preliminary Investigation in the Implementation of Criminal Prosecution

Legal Concept ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 12-20
Author(s):  
Nina Manova
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
The Public ◽  
Real Model ◽  
Essential Components ◽  
General Scientific

Introduction: one of the most influential actors in the system of law enforcement agencies of any state, in any system of criminal proceedings, is the prosecutor; in this connection, the purpose of the work was to study his role in coordinating the activities of the bodies of inquiry and preliminary investigation in the implementation of criminal prosecution. Methods: the methodological framework for the work consists of the general scientific (dialectical, systemic, structural-functional, logical, etc.) and the specific scientific (formal-legal, comparative-legal, etc.) research methods. Results: the author’s position presented in the paper is based on the analysis of the legislative regulation, the knowledge accumulated in the theory of the criminal procedure and practical experience of the coordination and personal implementation of the criminal prosecution activities by the prosecutor in the pretrial stages of the criminal process. Conclusions: as a result of the study, the role of the prosecutor as the organizer and head of the criminal prosecution carried out by the inquirer and the investigator is justified; the mistakes made in reforming the procedural position of the prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings are revealed; the essential components in the real model of the prosecutor’s activity that were not taken into account by the legislator are identified: the nature of the prosecutor’s relationships with other participants in the process and his key role in the implementation of criminal prosecution (his responsibility for the legality of the pre-trial criminal prosecution, and the duty to maintain the public prosecution in court).

Criminal law and economic activity (ratio of private and public interests)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Artemov ◽  
N. Golovanova ◽  
A. Gravina ◽  
O. Zaycev ◽  
V. Kashepov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Policy ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
General Description ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Legitimate Interests

The scientific and practical guide is devoted to the formation of a comprehensive and systematic approach to improving the activities of the court and preliminary investigation bodies in cases of crimes committed in the field of business and other economic activities (including taking into account the experience of law enforcement practice in criminal prosecution of entrepreneurs in a number of foreign countries). The problem of establishing a balance between the duties of judicial and investigative bodies within their competence to take measures to ensure economic security and to respect the rights and legitimate interests of entrepreneurs involved in criminal proceedings is considered. The author defines the main directions and forms of modern criminal policy in this area; gives a General description of the criminal legal situation in terms of ensuring economic security; identifies additional guarantees of the rights and legitimate interests of entrepreneurs provided in the implementation of law enforcement activities. Particular importance is attached to the study of substantive and criminal procedural mechanisms used in criminal proceedings on economic crimes. For researchers, practicing lawyers, representatives of the business community, teachers, postgraduates, students of law schools and faculties, as well as for a wide range of readers interested in this issue.

scholarly journals Termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) as a result of voluntary compensation for damage caused by a crime in the russian criminal court legal proceedings

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3B) ◽  
pp. 645-651
Author(s):  
Artem Igorevich Neryakhin ◽  
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov ◽  
Vasily Dzhonovich Potapov ◽  
Denis N. Stacyuk ◽  
Tatiana Ivanovna Bondar
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage

The authors study the controversial issues of termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) on the condition of voluntary compensation for the damage caused by the crime by the suspect (accused) during the preliminary investigation. The thesis is proved that in Russian criminal proceedings the procedure for voluntary compensation for damage caused by a crime is quite clearly regulated, and if the suspect (accused) voluntarily compensated for the property damage caused, then their actions will be evaluated within the current legal framework, when the fact of compensation for damage creates grounds for exemption from criminal liability and termination of the criminal case (criminal prosecution) in accordance with Articles 75, 76, 761, 762 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, Articles 25, 251, 28, 281 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Discretionary Model of Legal Regulation of a Criminal Case and Criminal Prosecution Termination: Pro et Contra

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 214-222
Author(s):  
G. N. Kucherov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law

The paper discusses the issues of choosing the most effective model of criminal proceedings termination, analyzes the proposed in the scientific literature model of refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer when making an appropriate procedural decision. The author, based on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, studies the relationship between the principle of justice and the legality of procedural decisions to terminate a criminal case and criminal prosecution. The author concludes that the discretionary model of legal regulation of a criminal case and criminal prosecution termination is an effective means of achieving the purpose of criminal proceedings, allowing the law enforcement officer to make a fair decision, given the nature, degree of social danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission, information about the identity of the person who committed the crime. Refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer in the matter of terminating a criminal case will not only not contribute to the humanization of legislation, but will mark the victory of formalism over justice in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Initiation of Criminal Proceedings against a Particular Person as the Ground for Recognizing him as a Suspect (para 1, part 1, art. 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation)

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 71-78
Author(s):  
I. V. Smolkova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper is devoted to the analysis of a new ground for recognition of a person as a suspect, introduced under the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, namely, the initiation of a criminal case against the person. The ground under consideration has caused controversial debates among criminal process scholars. The author has carried out a retrospective analysis of the legislative regulation of this ground for giving a person the status of the suspect. The paper evaluates various doctrinal approaches to its merits and disadvantages. The author also demonstartes the need for the new ground for recognition of a person as the suspect in law enforcement on the basis of statistical data, according to which more than half of criminal cases in Russia are initiated against a particular person. The study at question reveals an interconnection between initiation of proceedings upon commission of a crime and a particular person. The conclusion is substantiated that the recognition of a person as a suspect in case of initiation of criminal proceedings against him is aimed at ensuring his right to protection from criminal prosecution. However, the issuance of the order to initiate criminal proceedings against a particular person entails the possibility of implementation of coercive criminal procedural measures against him. It is shown that suspicion forms the substantive basis of recognition of a person as the suspect. The author criticises the approach according to which the issuance of the order to initiate criminal proceedings against a particular person forms an allegation that he has committed an act prohibited under the criminal law. Under this approach the assumption is made that can later be either proven or refuted in the course of further investigation. The author criticises the practice of dividing criminal cases into a judicial perspective and lacking such a perspective, which entails violations of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals suspected in committing crimes.

scholarly journals On the problem of establishing a condition for compensation for damage and making amends for damage when a criminal case (criminal prosecution) is terminated in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 129-134
Author(s):  
I.V. Fatyanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage

The article examines the ambiguity in the interpretation of article 76.2 of the Criminal code and article 25.1 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation to establish terms of compensation for the damage and (or) smoothing caused by the crime harm. The author substantiates the argument about the fallacy of considering this condition only formally, the author focuses on the mandatory establishment in this case of the characteristics of the identity of the guilty person and the measure of public danger of the committed act. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the approach proposed by the author to the study of the problem of establishing such a condition. In particular, the author considers it essential to solve such a problem to study the legal nature of compensation for damage and compensation for damage when a criminal case (criminal prosecution) is terminated on this basis. The author defines the specifics, identifies the main purposes of such a legal phenomenon in the context of a legal problem. The article concludes that if the preliminary investigation body and (or) the court (justice of the peace) the lack of property harmful consequences from the crime, the failure to make reparation is not to be considered as an obstacle to the termination of criminal proceedings on the grounds provided by article 25.1 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation, article 76.2 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. As a conclusion, the scientific work has prepared a specific text of the interpretation of the condition in the relevant explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which will exclude ambiguity on this issue from the law enforcement officer.

scholarly journals Seizure of objects, substances and materials before the initiation of criminal proceedings: Procedural grounds, legal consequences, problems and ways to solve them

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 936-949
Author(s):  
Alexey I. Alexandrov ◽  
◽  
Elena V. Elagina ◽  
Anton G. Kharatishvili ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officers ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Material Objects ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law And Legislation ◽  
Legal Consequences

Problems at the stage of the initiation of criminal proceedings, both in the criminal process and in criminalistics, have always been perceived as acutely relevant. After all, it is at this stage of criminal proceedings that the formation of the evidence base begins where as a rule, the collection, documentation and subsequent research of material objects (objects, substances and materials) both seized in the course of investigative actions, and received in the course of other actions, can be conditionally called non — procedural. Practice shows that law enforcement officers refer to the Federal law “On Police”, The Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, and the norms of the Federal Law “On Operational and Investigative Activities” to justify the legality and legitimacy of their actions, which, according to the authors, is very controversial, since these normative sources do not contain the appropriate grounds. This article deals with issues related to the seizure of material objects — items, substances and materials that are important for the investigation of crimes, in cases when a criminal case has not yet been initiated, which limits the possibility of using the procedural mechanisms provided for by criminal procedure legislation implemented at the stage of preliminary investigation. The authors are not restricted to criminal procedural institutions and consider the problem of seizures in the context of administrative law and legislation governing investigative activities.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE PROSECUTOR AS FACTORS DETERMINING THE SPECIFICS OF PROSECUTOR's SUPERVISION IN PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-132
Author(s):  
A.A. Nasonov
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The article analyzes the opinions of scientists expressed during the scientific discussion that unfolded around the issue of criminal procedure functions of the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. Provides additional arguments in favor of supervision of execution of laws as the main function of the Prosecutor under the Law on the Prosecutor determines other types of prosecutorial activities (criminal prosecution, the preliminary investigation, etc.) that are supportive in nature. These types of Prosecutor's activities are not only ways to specify Prosecutor's supervision in criminal proceedings, but also means of implementing the criminal procedure function of the prosecution, which exists according to the concept of the current criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, focused on the adversarial process, along with the function of protection and the function of resolving criminal cases. The article also addresses the issue of granting additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. It is proved that the decision to grant additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings should create opportunities to maintain the necessary balance in pre-trial proceedings between Prosecutor's supervision, departmental control and judicial control. Evidence is given that the harmonious existence of Prosecutor's supervision and departmental control in pre-trial proceedings will allow us to count on overcoming existing violations of the law in the investigation of crimes, which currently remain many.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document