SHORTENED TIMELINE OF APPEAL AGAINST INTERIM COURT DECISIONS MADE AT A PRE-TRIAL STAGE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Medical Organization ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the problem of classifying interim decisions among those that are appealed in a shortened timeline, and determining the list of such decisions, as well as the closely related problem of determining the rules for calculating such a shortened timeline. Currently, the Criminal Procedure law provides for the possibility of appealing a number of interim decisions made at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings before the final decision Moreover, for appealing some interim decisions at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings, a general period of appeal is provided - 10 days from the date of the court decision, or the same period from the date of serving with a copy of the decision the person who is in custody, while for others a shortened timeline is 3 days from the date of the decision. Meanwhile, it follows from the literal interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that within a shortened three-day period, court decisions on the election of preventive measures in the form of a ban on certain actions, bail, house arrest, detention, the refusal to apply them or extend their application can be appealed. At the same time, such a conclusion is not confirmed either in the positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation or in judicial practice. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedure law, the position of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation, scientific literature and practice, several problems are highlighted. Thus, the author states the discrepancy between the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation when it comes to establishing the terms for appealing the court decision on a preventive measure in the form of bail. In addition, there is no single criterion for establishing shortened deadlines for appealing interim decisions, and there-fore, the list of such decisions requires analysis. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a norm that determines the rules for calculating daily terms. The author formulates several proposals for amendments. It is proposed to determine the criteria for a shortened appeal timeline as the restriction of the constitutional right to liberty and immunity of a person that requires the immediate judicial review of the lawfulness of such a decision. It is also necessary to correct the phrasing of Article 106 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the procedure for applying a preventive measure in the form of bail, and establish the rule that appeal against such an interim court decision is filed according to the rules of Chapter 45.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code within ten days. The list of court decisions which must be appealed in a shortened timeline must be expanded by a court decision on putting a suspect or an accused into a medical organization providing medical or psychiatric care in hospital settings for forensic examination, as well as the extension of a person’s stay in a medical organization. In addition, the author has analyzed the approaches to the calculation of daily terms and proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation by establishing a single procedure for calculating daily terms, which does not take into account the day that served as a starting point of the term.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATIVE REGULATION OF DETENTION OF PERSONS PERFORMING CERTAIN TYPES OF PUBLIC LEGAL ACTIVITY

2020 ◽  
pp. 41-48
Author(s):  
Владимир Юрьевич Стельмах
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legislative Regulation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

В статье рассматриваются вопросы нормативного регулирования избрания меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу в отношении лиц, выполняющих определенные виды публично-правовой деятельности и в силу этого наделенных законодательством иммунитетом от уголовного преследования; порядок рассмотрения компетентными государственными органами ходатайств органов предварительного расследования и прокуратуры о лишении лица иммунитета от уголовного преследования; анализируются положения уголовно-процессуального закона и иных нормативных актов, регламентирующих правовой статус лиц, обладающих данным иммунитетом. Особое внимание уделяется порядку избрания меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу в отношении членов Совета Федерации, депутатов Государственной Думы и судей. Предлагаются корректировки уголовно-процессуального закона и закрепление положений об обязательности получения согласия компетентного государственного органа на избрание, а не на исполнение меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу. The article deals with the problems of regulatory regulation of detention of persons performing certain types of public legal activities, for which immunity from criminal prosecution is established. The special features of the detention of these persons are provided for by the Criminal Procedure Act, as well as other normative acts. At present, the law establishes that a court decision on detention against members of the Federation Council, deputies of the State Duma and judges is executed with the consent of the Chamber of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the qualification board of judges. Taking into account the principle of the independence of the court and the obligation of court decisions, it is proposed to amend the law and to provide for the consent of these bodies to choose this preventive measure, rather than to implement the court decision.

scholarly journals Transformation of Criminal Proceedings against Minors in Contemporary Russian Criminal Procedure: Towards the Twentieth Anniversary of the Adoption of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-166
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav V. Nikolyuk ◽  
◽  
Elena V. Markovicheva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

Introduction. In the Russian criminal process, criminal proceedings against minors have historically taken shape as a complicated procedure. Twenty years of operation of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation have shown sufficient efficiency of legal regulation of criminal procedural relations having to do with the investigation and consideration of this category of criminal cases. But in the process of law enforcement, a number of problems were identified that required resolution through the adjustment of the current criminal procedure law. This article is devoted to the analysis of the most significant changes in the normative regulation of criminal proceedings against minors during the period of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. A critical understanding of the process of transformation of the relevant norms will contribute to the development of an updated regulatory model of criminal justice involving minors. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The theoretical basis of the study consisted of both Russian and foreign scientific works in the field of criminal procedural law, specifically those devoted to both complicated proceedings in general and the specifics of juvenile criminal proceedings. The use of a formal legal research method allowed us to identify patterns in the transformation of criminal proceedings against minors. Results. The article reveals the most significant transformations of the normative regulation of criminal proceedings against minors. Some changes and additions made to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation during the period of its validity are analysed. Further, he main directions for further scientific discussion on the legal regulation of criminal procedure relations with the participation of minors are outlined. Discussion and Conclusion. Although criminal proceedings against minors show sufficient efficiency and compliance with international law, there is a need to systematise the criminal procedural norms governing the participation in criminal proceedings of all minors, regardless of their procedural status. The authors propose, within the framework of the updated criminal procedure law, to systematically consolidate the norms governing the legal status of not only the underage defendants, but also the juvenile victims and witnesses.

The Requirement of Legality of Decisions of the Criminal Court: The Legal Basis and Content Components

2021 ◽  
pp. 213-224
Author(s):  
Sergey V. Burmagin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Russian Science ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

Legality as a complex legal requirement to judicial decisions, developed for a long time by Russian science and legal practice, was formally consolidated in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in 2001 and extended to all decisions of the criminal court. However, the wording of the law does not fully and adequately reflect the content of this requirement, and to some extent it contradicts the established scientific ideas and needs of judicial practice. In this regard, the author aims to reveal the content side of the concept of legality of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings, both from a historical perspective and from the perspective of modern legal understanding, and to justify the need to adjust the legislative expression of this requirement. The research problems are solved using historical, dialectical and comparative legal methods of cognition based on the analysis of relevant theoretical concepts developed by the Russian science of criminal procedure law, the provisions of criminal procedure legislation and the legal positions of the judicial authorities: the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, federal courts of general jurisdiction. The legal sources of regulatory requirements that the criminal court should follow when making procedural decisions have been identified. The author substantiates the need for an expanded understanding of the legality of judicial decisions as their compliance not only with direct instructions of the law, but also with legal provisions contained in other forms of law: constitutional norms, generally recognized principles and norms of international law, established legal customs, as well as standards of justice developed by judicial practice and legal positions on specific issues of law enforcement. In the context of historical development, the material and procedural aspects of the requirement of legality of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings are analyzed and its content components are formulated. Continuity and at the same time dynamism of doctrinal and legislative approaches to determining the legality of court decisions supported by judicial practice are noted. Certain shortcomings of the normative consolidation of the requirement of legality of court decisions in the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are revealed, in connection with which specific proposals are made to change and optimize certain formulations of the procedural law that determine the content of the requirement of legality of a sentence and other court decisions in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals On the Right of the Accused Parties to an Appeal of Interim Court Decisions Made at the Pre-Trial Stage: Protection of Private and Public Interests

2020 ◽  
pp. 47-52
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Of Appeal

The article examines the problem of determining the list of participants on the part of the prosecution, endowed with the right to appeal the interim decisions made at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings. Currently, the appeal and revision of interim decisions are carried according to Chapter 45.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. However, Chapter does not take into account the specificity of the preliminary investigation stage, in particular, the subject composition of its participants. As a result, the list of the subjects entitled to appeal of the interim court decisions at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings remains controversial. The article discusses the right of the investigator and the head of the investigative body to file an appeal as well as the right of the victim to initiate proceedings in the court of appeal in defense of private interest. Drawing on the analysis of literature and practices of appealing interim court decisions, the author identifies the problems of theory and practice, including: 1) the prosecutor’s right to appeal is not sufficient to ensure tp protect public interests; 2) the controversial right of the investigator, or the head of the investigative body to file a complaint with the court of appeal; 3) there is no legal obligation of state bodies to notify the victim about the initiation of a petition before the court for a preventive measure or an investigative action, which may prevent the victim from exercising their right to appeal. The author proposes: 1) to supplement the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation with a list of subjects for filing (presenting) a complaint of interim decisions, including the investigator as the main participant in the process at the stage of preliminary investigation; 2) to legislate the investigator’s obligation to notify the victim about the initiation of a petition before the court for the application of a preventive measure, placement of the accused in a hospital for an examination, etc., as well as the obligation of the court to send the victim copies of decisions on these petitions.

scholarly journals Analysis of the project “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation to provide the victim, suspect, accused with the possibility of reconciliation”

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 362-367
Author(s):  
N.V. Mashinskaya ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The problem of legislative regulation of the procedure for reconciliation of the victim with the suspected, the accused until a certain time was only a subject of discussion in the scientific literature. At the same time the state’s need to find measures that can eliminate the consequences of crimes without the use of ordinary criminal procedures has actualized the work on introducing alternative methods of settling the criminal-legal conflict into criminal proceedings. Given the urgent need to apply this procedure in practice, the Interregional Public Center “Judicial and Legal Reform” has developed and posted on its website a draft federal law “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation to Provide the Victim, Suspect, and Accused with the Possibility of Reconciliation.” To implement the procedure for reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the drafters of the bill propose to include a new chapter in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). The author of the article critically evaluates the attempt due to the inconsistency of a number of novels, their uncertainty and inconsistency with the norms of the criminal procedure law. To eliminate the existing shortcomings, it is proposed to provide a separate article defining the procedural status of the conciliator and to include the specified rule in Ch. 8 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. As a guarantee of the right of the victim, suspect, accused to reconciliation, the introduction of an appropriate addition to the criminal procedure norms governing the legal status of the named participants in criminal proceedings is considered.

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 FEATURES OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF PRIVATE PROSECUTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 875-880
Author(s):  
E.F. Tensina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedural Rights

The article reveals the nature of the claim of a private prosecution, which establishes the freedom to dispose of material and procedural rights. The forms of manifestation of dispositive principles in the material and procedural aspects in the course of criminal proceedings are determined. Taking into account the nature of the claim of a private prosecution, various models of proceedings in criminal cases of a private prosecution and the peculiarities of the implementation of the provisions of the criminal procedure principle of the presumption of innocence are considered. The author critically assesses the legal constructions that allow the application of a special procedure for making a court decision in criminal proceedings of a private prosecution if the accused agrees with the charge brought. In particular, taking into account the provisions of the principle of the presumption of innocence, it is concluded that it is inadmissible to apply Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation when considering a criminal case of a private prosecution if it is initiated by filing an application directly with a magistrate in the manner prescribed by Art. 318 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation or when investigating a criminal case of this category in the form of an abbreviated inquiry, regulated by Ch. 32.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

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.

The Admissibility of Statements Provided by an Accused Person in the Russian Criminal Procedure

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 1684
Author(s):  
Roman KOSTENKO ◽  
Georgii YURIEV
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Special Significance ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Evidence ◽  
General Characterization ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Admissible Evidence

This article substantiates that compliance with the requirement of admissible evidence acquires special significance for a criminal proceedings, which is proved by the analysis of various sources, including the current edition of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Therefore, the article aims to determine the nature of admissible statements of the accused in the Russian criminal procedure as one of the most important types of legal evidence. The authors of the article have obtained crucial results for the study of criminal proceedings, defined the basic requirements that should be met by admissible statements of an accused person, analyzed rules for admitting statements of the accused, performed their general characterization and formulated the main provisions defining the essence of statements provided by the accused in criminal proceedings. The main conclusion reached in this article is that the admissibility of statements provided by the accused should comply with the following basic rules: (1) the rule of appropriate subjects authorized by virtue of the existing Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to carry out procedural actions for collecting (obtaining, recording) evidence; (2) the rule of proper information sources on the facts provided for by the current Criminal Procedure Code; (3) the rule of proper proceedings stipulated by the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation for collecting (receiving, recording) evidence; (4) the rule of the proper procedure provided for by the current Criminal Procedure Code for collecting (receiving, recording) evidence from the viewpoint of its proper obtaining is considered as the need to comply with requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document