scholarly journals German Experience of Terminating Criminal Prosecution with the Imposition of Duties and Regulations on the Accused in the Context of the Russian Draft Law on Criminal Offence

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 775-785
Author(s):  
Aleksey Tarbagaev ◽  
Ludmila Maiorova ◽  
Yana Ploshkina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
The Supreme Court

The second attempt of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to introduce the concept of a criminal offence into Russian criminal and criminal procedure legislation widens the non-rehabilitating grounds for the termination of a criminal case or prosecution with the imposition of other criminal law measures: it is suggested that, in addition to a court fine, community work and partially paid work should also be introduced. This leads to certain problems, including problems with the presumption of innocence and the observance of the principle of justice. The authors turn to the German experience for a better understanding of the situation. Germany faced similar problems much earlier, when § 153а was introduced in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Federal Republic of Germany (CPC of the FRG); it provided for an opportunity to terminate criminal prosecution for criminal offences on the grounds of expediency with the imposition of duties and regulations on the accused, which are akin to criminal law measures under draft law № 1112019-7. Taking into consideration the theoretical approaches developed in Germany, the practice of the Constitutional Court of the FRG and the Supreme Court of the FRG, the authors examine the goals of introducing § 153а in the CPC of the FRG, the practice of its implementation, as well as the problem of terminating criminal prosecution on the grounds of expediency with the imposition of duties and regulations on the accused connected with the observance of the Constitution of the FRG, the presumption of innocence, the principles of justice, certainty, equality before law; they analyze the controversial legal nature of duties and regulations under § 153а in the CPC of the FRG. According to German criminal procedure law, the termination of criminal prosecution on the grounds of expediency with the imposition of duties and regulations on the accused is a right, and not a duty of the corresponding officers and agencies as it is, in fact, an alternative to criminal prosecution which makes it possible to terminate it at a certain stage when there are all the necessary legal grounds for criminal prosecution.

scholarly journals Judicial legal positions in the context of conflicts related to the formation of the procedural status of persons against whom acts of criminal prosecution are actually implemented

2019 ◽  
pp. 114-119
Author(s):  
Sergey Grachev
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The article considers the grounds for the emergence of the procedural status of a suspect in a criminal case. The rights and obligations of the specified person, including the right to protection are analyzed. Subject to the requirements of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation, legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation the conclusion about the necessity of legislative consolidation of the procedural status of the person whose rights and lawful interests are affected carried out in relation to proceedings for verification of a crime report in accordance with article 144 of the Criminal procedure code and equating it to the status of a suspect, since during the pre-investigation check he has the right to protection from the criminal prosecution actually carried out against him.

scholarly journals ASPEK HUKUM PENINJAUAN KEMBALI LEBIH DARI SATU KALI DALAM PERKARA PIDANA (PERSPEKTIF PENEGAKAN KEADILAN, KEPASTIAN DAN KEMANFAATAN HUKUM)

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 335
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Matters

Constitutional Court Decision No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013 has opened the space PK is not just one time as provided for by the Article 268 paragraph (3) Criminal Procedure Code so that PK can be done many times during found and submission of PK Novum although it has done previously. Perspective is the basis of this decision is justice. Responding to the verdict of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court publishes SEMA No. 7 Year 2014 on Reconsideration Request Submission In Criminal Case. Through the SEMA Supreme Court warned that provisions PK only once outside the Article 268 Criminal Procedure Code which was canceled by the Constitutional Court, therefore, PK criminal cases (in a similar case) is more than 1 (one) can not be accepted. Restrictions on the desired PK criminal case the Supreme Court is to provide legal certainty in the process of final settlement of criminal matters. Government through Minister of Law and Human Rights take strategic steps in resolving the legal expediency vision polemic filing legal remedies PK criminal cases, by coordinating state agencies and relevant ministries so as to produce an agreement that filing PK many times can not be executed until the issuance of PP. Therefore still valid set forth in the Judicial Authority Law and the Law on the Supreme Court.Keywords : Legal Aspects, Reconsideration, Criminal Case

scholarly journals Penyelesaian Perkara Pencurian sebagai Tindak Pidana Ringan Pasca Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2 Tahun 2012

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-24
Author(s):  
Gede Mahadi Waisnawa Hanata Putra ◽  
I Nyoman Putu Budiartha ◽  
Ni Made Sukaryati Karma
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
East Indies ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
A Minor

Indonesian Criminal Law is currently a legacy from the Dutch East Indies Government which has been adapted and passed by Law No. 16 of 1946 to be implemented nationally. The purpose of this research is to describe the regulation of theft of minor crimes in the Criminal Code before the Supreme Court Regulation Number 2 of 2012 and to describe the juridical consequences of Supreme Court Regulation No.2 of 2012 on theft as a minor criminal act in the Criminal Code. This research uses normative legal research methods. The results show that according to Article 206 of the Criminal Procedure Code, procedures for granting authority to investigate and review cases are carried out by the investigator himself and should not be disturbed by the prosecutor. This Perpres adjusts articles 364, 373, 379, 384, 407 and article 482 of the Criminal Code to Rp. 2,500,000.00. Therefore, fulfill this element of the requirement and enter a case where the value of the commodity does not exceed Rp. 2,500,000.00. Therefore, the case is examined by expedited procedure, which is tried by a judge, and the assignment and review of the case is carried out by the investigator himself without the interference of the prosecutor.

scholarly journals ANALISIS UPAYA HUKUM KASASI OLEH JAKSA PENUNTUT UMUM TERHADAP PUTUSAN BEBAS

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-93
Author(s):  
Munarty Munarty ◽  
Marwan Mas ◽  
Ruslan Renggong
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Republic

Secara teori, Jaksa Penuntut Umum (JPU) tidak diperkenankan mengajukan upaya hukum kasasi terhadap vonis bebas sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 244 KUHAP. Namun dalam praktek selama ini, Jaksa Penuntut Umum telah beberapa kali mengajukan kasasi terhadap putusan bebas dan beberapa di antaranya di kabulkan oleh Mahkamah Agung. Hal ini terjadi karena larangan mengajukan kasasi atas vonis bebas sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 244 KUHAP terkesan multitafsir sehingga menimbulkan perbedaan pendapat dalam penerapannya. Kondisi semacam ini sangat berseberangan dengan prinsip-prinsip Negara Hukum, khususnya dalam Upaya mewujudkan kepastian hukum. Atas dasar itulah, Mahkamah Konstitusi melalui putusannya dengan nomor 114/PUU-X/2012 menyatakan bahwa Frasa “kecuali terhadap putusan bebas” sebagaimana tercantum dalam Pasal 244 Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) adalah bertentangan dengan UUD Negara Republik Indonesia tahun 1945. Menurut pertimbangan hukum Mahkamah Konstitusi, larangan mengajukan kasasi atau Putusan Bebas oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum tidak memberikan upaya hukum biasa terhadap putusan bebas serta menghilangkan fungsi Mahkamah Agung sebagai Pengadilan Kasasi terhadap Putusan Bebas, sehingga tidak tercapai kepastian hukum yang adil dan prinsip perlakukan yang sama di hadapan hukum. In theory, public prosecutors (JPU) are not allowed to file a cassation against the acquittal as stipulated in Article 244 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, in practice so far, Public Prosecutors have several times filed an appeal against the acquittal decisions and some of them have been granted by the Supreme Court. This occurs because the prohibition on filing an appeal for an acquittal as stipulated in Article 244 of the Criminal Procedure Code has multiple interpretations, which creates different opinions in its application. This kind of condition is very contrary to the principles of rule of law, especially in the effort to create legal certainty. On that basis, the Constitutional Court through its decision number 114 / PUU-X / 2012 stated that the phrase "except for free decisions" as contained in Article 244 of Law Number 8 Year 1981 concerning Criminal Procedure Law (KUHAP) is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. According to the legal considerations of the Constitutional Court, the prohibition against filing an appeal or Free Decision by Public Prosecutors does not provide ordinary remedies against free decisions and eliminates the function of the Supreme Court as a Cassation Court against Free Decisions, so that fair legal certainty is not achieved and the principle of equal treatment in the law.

scholarly journals THE NORMATIVE RESOLUTION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN “ON THE PRACTICE OF THE COURTS APPLYING THE CRIMINAL LAW IN CASES OF CRIMES RELATED TO VIOLATION OF THE RULES OF THE ROAD AND THE OPERATION OF VEHICLES” DATED JUNE 29, 2011, AND THE CRIMINAL LAW

2020 ◽  
pp. 69-75
Author(s):  
K.A. Bakishev
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
The Road ◽  
Regulatory Decision ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Sufficient Degree ◽  
The Republic

The Concept of the legal policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 2010 to 2020emphasizes that the criminal law must meet the requirements of legal accuracy and predictability ofconsequences, that is, its norms must be formulated with a sufficient degree of clarity and based on clearcriteria that exclude the possibility of arbitrary interpretation provisions of the law. Meanwhile, an analysisof the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan shows that some articles on liability for road transportoffences are designed poorly. For example, Art. 346 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan ischaracterized by a combination of formal and qualified corpus delicti, as well as two forms of guilt — intentand negligence; in Art. 351 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the circle of subjects of thecriminal offence was significantly reduced due to the unjustified exclusion of drivers of non-mechanicalvehicles. As a result, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the regulatory decree «On thepractice of the courts applying the criminal law in cases of crimes related to violation of the rules of theroad and the operation of vehicles’ of June 29, 2011 made a number of errors and contradictions that led todifficulties in qualifying the criminal offence and the appointment criminal punishment. Taking into accountthe law-enforcement and legislative experience of Kazakhstan and other countries in the field of ensuringtraffic safety, the author proposes amendments and additions to the named regulatory decision of theSupreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan to improve its quality and improve law enforcement practice.

scholarly journals A Special Legal Approach to Interpretation of Norms of Criminal Procedure Law

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
D. P. Velikiy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper discusses the issue of a special legal approach to interpretation of norms of criminal procedure law. On the example of criminal procedural law the author substantiates the independent character of the special legal method of interpretation, its difference from the grammatical and systematic (systemic) methods of interpretation of law, as well as the place of this method among other means of interpretation. The subject of special legal interpretation include: special legal terms, concepts, categories, legal structures, types (regularities) of legal regulation, rules of legal technique, theoretical provisions. The vast majority of such interpretations were carried out by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, which is predetermined by the need for a common understanding of criminal procedural terminology. Unlike grammatical interpretation, which provides a linguistic analysis of the text of the law, systematic interpretation in which interpretation takes into account the place of the norm in the systemic relationship with other norms, in special legal interpretation the main source of information is legal knowledge, i.e. the knowledge of law and legal theory. If a special legal interpretation is carried out by an official body, it is usually normative. Also, based on the legal stances of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the author gives examples of “evolution” of legal standings from special legal interpretation to adoption and amendment of legal norms. The article investigates the judicial practice containing the results of special legal interpretation of criminal procedural rules, e.g. legal concepts and terms defined by the same words, but having different meaning depending on the branch of law in which they are used. The author also gives examples of determination of the branch of law to which the norm belongs by means of special legal interpretation.

scholarly journals Consequences of failure to pay a court fine

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 639-650
Author(s):  
Nina Yu. Skripchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legislative Regulation

The article discusses issues that arose during enforcement of the new grounds for exemption from criminal responsibility, enshrined in 2016, in connection with a court fine (Article 76.2 of the Criminal Code). Despite the criticism of its legislative regulation, demand for a new way of ceasing criminal prosecution began to appear in connection with the non-payment of a fine. Having determined the voluntary execution of a court fine, the legislator did not settle the issue of the further execution of the fine in cases where there are valid reasons for non-payment. After analyzing the existing proposals to solve this problem, the author confirms that the elimination of the gap would be facilitated by the legislative obligation of the bailiff to establish the circumstances by which the judicial penalty is not paid, as well as the addition of the list of decisions made by the bailiff to suspend enforcement proceeding. Analysis of judicial practice showed that Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code began to be applied in cases where the court has justification for implementing less onerous grounds for the defendant to be exempt from criminal liability. Legislative duplication of the conditions under which criminal prosecution can be terminated for various reasons calls into question the wide alternative of the latter, as well as the embodiment of the idea of humanizing criminal law, which is the basis for securing a new ground for exemption from criminal liability. The article substantiates the proposal to supplement the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court dated June 27, 2013 with a provision allowing the release of a person from criminal responsibility with a judicial fine in cases where the court has no basis for suspending criminal prosecution for unconditional types of exemption from criminal liability. The author draws attention to the gap in the legislation, part 3 of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which is related to the renewal of the statute of limitations for criminal liability when an individual avoids paying a court fine.

scholarly journals The Theory of Criminal Law Should Not Be Reduced to the Analysis and Criticism of Criminal Legislation

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-140
Author(s):  
Anatoly Naumov
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Principle Of Legality

In both normative and sociological senses criminal law includes three components — criminal legislation, judicial practice, and criminal law doctrine, and the development of this branch of law is possible only in their unity. The criminal law doctrine is to a certain extent superior to the other components of the "triad" and involves the development of the branch’s principles, goals and objectives. At the same time, the improvement of criminal law is not the only goal of the theory of criminal law. It should not be limited only to criticism of the current legislation and proposals for its improvement. However, the vast majority of modern domestic criminal law publications, such as monographs, articles in legal periodicals, dissertations, are devoted to criticism of the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Indeed, the current criminal law is not perfect, but the "imbalance" of research into the "law-making" side significantly reduces the scope of criminal law doctrine. And there will always be demand for theoretical studies on the analysis of the subject and method, system and objectives of criminal law, its sources.Debatable, for example, still is the issue of the legal nature of the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and, in particular, the judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court are a special kind of judicial interpretation and a fairly reliable tool for the courts to understand "the letter of the criminal law" and it’s applicability to the particular case. As for the assessment of the legal nature of the judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the criminal law doctrine often fails to notice that they touch upon the methodological problems of the theory of criminal law. In relation to a number of criminal law prohibitions, judgments of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation are a source of criminal law, along with the Criminal Code. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation specified the most important principle of criminal law — the principle of legality and clarified the characteristics of criminality of socially dangerous acts prohibited by criminal law, which is directly related to the issue of criminal liability. In this sense, the Constitutional Court formulated a new and important addition to the content of the principle of legality — the certainty of criminal law rules, and, first of all, the criminal law prohibitions. Thus, the judicial authority overtook the criminal law doctrine in solving one of the most important issues for criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals SOME ASPECTS OF THE PROSECUTOR'S PARTICIPATION IN REHABILITATION (IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 18 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 747-752
Author(s):  
A.I. Shmarev
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The author of the article, based on the analysis of statistical indicators of the Prosecutor's office for 2018-2019 and examples of judicial practice, including the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, examines the problematic issues of implementing the right to rehabilitation of persons unlawfully and unreasonably subjected to criminal prosecution, and the participation of the Prosecutor in this process. According to the author, the ambiguous judicial practice of considering issues related to the rehabilitation of this category of citizens requires additional generalization and analysis in order to make appropriate changes to the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 11 of 29.11.2011 "On the practice of applying the norms of Chapter 18 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation regulating rehabilitation in criminal proceedings". The examples given in the article of cancellation of lower-level court decisions were based on complaints of persons who independently sought to restore their rights, and not on the representations of the prosecutors involved in them, who were called upon to ensure the possibility of protecting human and civil rights and freedoms at the court session. The adoption of organizational measures, including those proposed by the author, in the system of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation will increase the role of the Prosecutor in protecting the rights of illegally and unreasonably prosecuted persons.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document