ON THE MODERN UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONCEPTS OF «LEGAL REMEDIES OF PROSECUTORIAL SUPERVISION» AND «FORMS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGAL REMEDIES OF PROSECUTORIAL SUPERVISION»

Author(s):  
Oleg V. Voronin ◽  

The concepts of "legal remedies of prosecutorial supervision" and "forms of implementa-tion of legal remedies of prosecutorial supervision" have independent content despite the slight crossing. The legal remedies of prosecutorial supervision include the powers of the prosecutor, acts of prosecutorial supervision, as well as the procedure for their implementa-tion, which represents the method for their application. The powers of the prosecutor are understood to be the totality of rights and responsibili-ties of the prosecutor, granted to him by the Law on Prosecutor's Office and other federal laws to perform the functions assigned to the prosecutor's office and to achieve its objectives and tasks. Traditionally, all the powers of the prosecutor are divided into two main groups: general, which are implemented in all directions and special, applied in separate areas of prosecutorial activities. The Acts of the prosecutor's response are documented law enforcement decisions of the prosecutor, containing a legal assessment of the state of the law in each case, as well as the prosecutor’s requests, arising from his authority to ensure the lawful state of the supervised environment. Acts of the prosecutor's response separate acts of prosecutorial supervision, which serve as a form of implementation of exclusively the supervisory function of the prose-cutor's office including protest, presentation and warning. The forms of implementation of legal means are the ways and methods of implementation of legal remedies (powers and acts), as well as the nature of their application. Unlike the legal remedies of prosecutorial supervision, they are characterized by a lower degree of statutory regulation and a more simplified content of the basic elements. There are two forms of implementation of legal remedies – a common and a proactive one. The general form represents such an order where the existence of information about the violation of the law (cause) and objectively existing signs of violation of the law (grounds) is necessary for exercising the powers of the prosecutor and/or to render acts. The proactive form means to exercise the prosecutor's powers and to render acts of the prosecutor's response, regardless of the presence of signals or reports of wrongdoings.

Author(s):  
Alexandr V. Izmalkov ◽  
Alexander A. Kuznetsov ◽  
Pavel A. Kuznetsov ◽  
Ella Y. Kuzmenko

We analyze the law enforcement practice of judicial authorities on taxes and fees, since the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is a rather controversial regulatory legal act. Tax disputes arise both at the initiative of tax authorities and at the initiative of taxpayers. Purpose: to determine the main directions of law enforcement practice of courts in tax disputes. We use general scientific and specially legal methods as research methods. The focus is on the method of analysis. In the course of the research, we analyze the con-sideration of cases by judicial authorities on tax disputes, their quantitative and qualitative characteristics. We conclude that the emergence of disagree-ments between taxpayers and the state body when resolving the issue of the legality of their actions (inaction), as well as the legality of a non-normative legal act is the main reason for the formation of law enforcement practice in tax disputes. During the passage of all stages of the application of the law, it is also necessary to establish the existence of a cause-and-effect relationship between the actions of the taxpayer and the resulting consequences. The main points of this process go through several stages. We define the main directions of the law enforcement practice of courts in tax disputes.


Author(s):  
И.А. Кузьмин

В статье приводятся промежуточные результаты исследования вопросов реализации юридической ответственности. Сформулированы подходы к пониманию механизма правового регулирования и его содержания. Установлены закономерности взаимодействий между правовыми средствами в процессе реализации юридической ответственности. Предложена общетеоретическая модель реализации юридической ответственности в правоохранительном блоке механизма правового регулирования. Проанализированы проблемные ситуации, при которых нарушаются принципы юридической ответственности и разрушаются системные связи между правовыми средствами. Annotation: The article presents the interim results of research on the realization of legal liability. Approaches to understanding the mechanism of legal regulation and its content are formulated. The patterns of interactions between legal remedies in the process of realization legal liability have been established. A general theoretical model of the realization of legal liability in the law enforcement block of the mechanism of legal regulation is proposed. The author analyzed problematic situations in which the principles of legal liability are violated, and the cases in which the systemic connections between legal remedies are destroyed.


Author(s):  
Komang Ekayana

Corrupted state assets certainly hurt the country narrowly, but also broadly where it harms the country and its people. However, the formal approach through the current criminal procedure law has not been able to recover the losses suffered by the state. In fact, state losses resulting from corruption are state assets that must be saved. Then there needs to be a new breakthrough to recover state losses through the asset recovery model. When looking at the country from the perspective of the victims, the state must obtain protection, in this case recovery from the losses suffered due to corruption. This paper examines the model of returning assets resulting from corruption in the law enforcement process that focuses on the rule of law in the 2003 UNCAC Convention and the mechanism of returning state assets in terms of Law No. 20 of 2001 concerning amendments to Law No. 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. 


Media Iuris ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 350
Author(s):  
Rendy Ardy Septia Yuristara

Advocates are the most vulnerable professions to be Gatekeepers in money laundering. Indeed, the advocate profession is part of the law enforcement apparatus that can contribute better in preventing money laundering activities to develop. Affirmation about the role of advocate that can suppress the occurrence of money laundering crime, that is with the issuance of PP. 43 of 2015, which places advocates as one of the reporting parties in the agenda of eradicating money laundering crime. However, the substance of the rule draws criticism from some misguided advocates in interpreting the intent and purpose of the arrangement. Moreover there are some advocates who consider that the rule is against the rules that regulate immunity rights in the profession advocate. The misinterpretation of some advocates related to the immunity rights inherent in the profession, causing the work of the advocate profession to be considered irrelevant, and not worthy of being called the nobleprofession (OfficiumNobile), But as a bad profession in integrity and promoting commercialization. In fact, the basic purpose of the arrangement of PP. 43 of 2015, which places the advocate profession as one of the reporting parties on the eradication agenda of money laundering, is a form of respect for the profession of advocate who is a noble profession, by prioritizing his professional responsibilities to the state, society and God, as well as his obligations as part of The legal profession to uphold the law and uphold the value of human rights while on duty.


Author(s):  
О. І. Безпалова

Розкрито сутність адміністративно-правового механізму реалізації правоохоронної функції держави. З'ясовано основні ознаки, характерні для адміністративно-правового ме­ханізму реалізації правоохоронної функції держави. Визначено перелік елементів, що вхо­дять до цього механізму. Обґрунтовано, що основними системоутворюючими елементами є інституційна та правова складові. Визначено основні кроки в напрямі забезпечення ефек­тивного функціонування адміністративно-правового механізму реалізації правоохоронної функції держави.   The essence of the administrative and legal mechanism for the implementation of the law enforcement functions of the state. Find out the main characteristics of an administrative and legal mechanism for the implementation of the law enforcement functions of the state. The list of items included in this mechanism. It is proved that the main elements of the backbone is the institutional and legal components. The basic steps to ensure the effective functioning of the administrative and legal mechanism for the implementation of the law enforcement functions of the state.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
Тимур Чукаев ◽  
Timur Chukaev

The Article is devoted to the theoretical and legal heritage of the prominent Russian lawyer Vasily Nikolaevich Leshkov (1810–1881), his ideas about society as a subject of public administration, about the interaction of civil society and the police as subjects of the implementation of the law enforcement function. The methodological basis of the research is general scientific (historical, systemic, functional) and special (formal-legal, historical-legal, comparative-legal) methods of legal research. A theoretical legacy, V. N. Leshkov, which contemporaries did not understand, and the descendants of the forgotten, to comprehend the researchers in the twenty-first century.


Author(s):  
Bagus Raharjo S. Hidayat ◽  
Ahmad Riyadh U. B.

The homeless phenomenon is very disturbing for the community. Moreover, homeless people have carried out land tenure unilaterally and against the law of someone's land. Furthermore, the purpose of this study is to measure the legal wisdom that can be done by land owners controlled by the Homeless. This research is a normative legal research using a statute approach. By using deductive analysis techniques using legal material processing methods in general. So that it can be analyzed legal problems based on facts in the field or in the community. The results of the study can be denied that the law enforcement of land tenure against the law by homeless people. Can be done in litigation or non-litigation. Litigation measures can be made in criminal and civil cases. The criminal mechanism is carried out by reporting to the police regarding the criminal law stipulated in Article 167 and Article 385 of the Criminal Code. A civil mechanism, the ruler of land and / or buildings thereon can be sued on the basis of an unlawful act along with an application for vacant land Non-litigation legal remedies can be made through complaints to the Satpol PP in the jurisdiction (locus) of the owner of the land rights. Satpol PP is an extension of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Provincial, Regency or City Government.


Yuridika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Bastianto Nugroho

The trial of a criminal case is to find out whether a criminal offense has occurred in an event, therefore in the most important criminal proceedings the proceedings are proved. Evidence is a problem that plays a role in the examination process in court because with this proof is determined the fate of a defendant. The legal function in the State of Indonesia is to regulate the order of society in the life of the nation and the state, whereas the violation of the law itself is an event that must exist in every society and is impossible to be eliminated absolutely, because violation of law is an integral part of development More complex. One of the provisions governing how the law enforcement officers carry out the task in the field of repressive is the criminal procedure law which has the purpose of searching and approaching material truth, the complete truth of a criminal case by applying the provisions of criminal procedure law honestly darn precisely with The purpose of finding out who the perpetrator can be charged with is a violation of the law. 


Author(s):  
A. P. Glazova

INTRODUCTION. Currently, states can apply a whole range of law enforcement measures at sea in order to prevent such unlawful phenomena as piracy, slave trade, drug trafficking, migrant smuggling, etc. However, the problem of the exercise of jurisdiction by states within various maritime areas is the main sticking point during the implementation of these measures. In an attempt to exercise the law enforcement function at sea, the state can't ignore the fact that its ability to create legal norms and ensure their effective implementation depends not only on its will as a sovereign, but also on the restrictions imposed by international law. Therefore, maintaining a balance between limiting the “territorialization” of maritime areas and the need to carry out a law enforcement function logically entails the need to determine the nature and content of the concept of “jurisdiction of the state” within different maritime areas, as well as to identify specific features of this legal category. The present article focuses on this and other related issues.MATERIALS AND METHODS. Historical and comparative analysis along with dogmatic research approach were used in the research process and the entire research is well grounded in focusing on the norms of international treaty law and customary law. In addition to that this research focuses on the norms of national law governing issues related to the application of law enforcement measurement at the sea. Apart from those given material and methodical inputs, the doctrinal works of the relevant jurists have been used in this research.RESEARCH RELULTS. The author comes to an alternative conclusion that territorial jurisdiction within the maritime territory is not absolute, which is due, apparently, the principle of freedom of the high seas which have a longer support by the international community. The definition of jurisdiction as extraterritorial is not self-sufficient, since in case of conflict of jurisdictions, additional legal criteria are required to resolve such a conflict. The classification of extraterritorial jurisdiction depending on the principles on which it is based also does not solve the problem, since some principles, such as protective or universal, in turn, require additional criteria in order to become a self-sufficient tool to overcome legal uncertainty. The author notes that the ability to exercise territorial jurisdiction within maritime areas, as a rule, determines the ability to exercise legislative and executive jurisdiction, which are also not absolute. The exercise of extraterritorial legislative or executive jurisdiction at sea is potentially permissible only on the basis of international law to solve a specific function, for example, law enforcement.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. The main problem of the varieties of jurisdiction proposed by in- ternational legal science is that each of them only supplements each other, describing a possible choice, but not explaining why a particular choice should be preferred in case of conflict. It is obvious that current uncertainty has created some severe impacts upon the institution of law enforcement measures at sea as a result of the absence of standards for enforcement measures that could make a balance to the mechanism. Hence the law enforcer has to be cautious with a number of factors in deciding the implementation of law enforcement measures within the sea.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document