scholarly journals Development of Procedural Law Foundations of Justice in Administrative Cases in the Context of the New Codification of Administrative and Tort Legislation

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 30-38
Author(s):  
O. V. Pankova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
Affirmative Response ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
New Codes ◽  
The Government ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Legal Mechanism ◽  
Current Code

The paper analyzes the necessity of a fundamental reform of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation with its division into two codes (a substantive part — the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, and a procedural part — the Procedural Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation). With regard to the problem of modernization of procedural administrative and tort legislation, the author questions the main directions, objectives and prerequisites of the third codification in this field and draws the conclusion that the fundamental reform of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation with the division of it into two codes — material and procedural — is premature and, in fact, political decision not grounded by feasible research results. The author highlights that the Concept of the new Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation approved at the meeting of the Government of the Russian Federation in June 2019 primarily deals with the issues of reforming mainly substantive administrative and tort legislation, while proposals for the improvement of procedural regulation of administrative responsibility are not covered in details. The Concept does not contain information concerning the fact that instead of the current Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation two new codes — the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation (CAO) and the Procedural Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation (PCAO) — will be adopted.The author focuses on the analysis of the draft of the PCAO published on the website of the Ministry of Justice of Russia. Primarily, the paper highlights such provisions that deserve an affirmative response. However, the author devotes the most significant part of the study to the analysis of the conceptual shortcomings of the PCAO of the Russian Federation. Without elimination of these shortcomings, it can hardly been concluded that a complete and qualitative procedural and legal mechanism for the implementation of justice in the field of administrative and tort relations is established in the courts of general jurisdiction.

Concept of Single Civil Procedure Code: Suggestions of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Екатерина Ганичева ◽  
Ekaterina Ganicheva ◽  
Андрей Габов ◽  
Andrey Gabov ◽  
Мария Глазкова ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Activity ◽  
The Government

This publication is the result of collective discussion at the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation of the Concept of a common code of civil procedure adopted in 2014. The article deals with the problem of harmonization of legislation governing the consideration of the various categories of cases within the jurisdiction of the courts of general jurisdiction and arbitration courts. Particular attention is paid to the problems of access to justice, coordination of legislative activity, taking into account the future prospects of unification of the rules and institutions governing the procedural arrangements of civil, administrative and criminal proceedings. The article describes the objective relationship between the development of an of procedural law and the law on the judicial system, which must be taken into account when solving problems to ensure the effective operation of the courts at all stages of trial and in all judicial instances. Certain problems that arose after the unification of the higher judiciary authorities are reviewed, recommendations aimed at improving the structure and organizational forms of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are given.

scholarly journals Evidence and Establishment of Evidence Norms in CIS Countries Criminal Procedures: A Comparative Legal Analysis

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 148-156
Author(s):  
S. V. Kornakova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Cis Countries ◽  
Procedure Codes ◽  
In Cis

The paper is devoted to a comparative legal analysis of some norms of the criminal procedure laws of the CIS countries concerning evidence and establishment of evidence in criminal procedures. The paper analyzes the legal definitions of the concept of "evidence" in the CIS countries codes. It is noted that the wording used in article 74 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation is less specific than the content of the relevant norms in the legislation of other CIS countries. In particular, the replacement of the phrase "this data is established", which was used in the RSFSR Criminal Procedure Code, with the phrase "evidence is" in part 2 of article 74 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, which led to an illegal identification of the sources of evidence and the evidence itself, is critically evaluated.Some features, advantages and disadvantages of the norms of criminal procedure laws of the CIS countries containing a list of sources of evidence are revealed. The conclusion is made about a clear advantage in this respect of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, part 2 of article 74 of which contains a complete and universal list of sources of evidence. At the same time, the need to include in this list, along with the testimony of the suspect and the accused, such a source of evidence as the testimony of the defendant is argued.The paper analyzes the legislative consolidation of the concept of "evidence" in the criminal procedure codes of the CIS countries, which allowed us to critically evaluate the definition given to this concept by the Russian legislator. According to the author, the absence of the purpose for the establishment of evidence in article 85 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, namely the purpose for establishing the circumstances listed in article 73 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, as a lawful, reasoned and just resolution of the case, is a significant shortcoming of the Russian criminal-procedural law that requires special legal address. 

scholarly journals Constitutional legal mechanism of ensuring with bodies of prosecutor’s office of the rights and freedoms of the person and citizen in Russian Federation

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-111
Author(s):  
I A Alzheev
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Law And Order ◽  
Social Tension ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Legal Mechanism ◽  
Coordination Activity

In article questions of realization of constitutional and legal bases of bodies of prosecutor’s office of the Russian Federation for law enforcement and a law and order, protection of the rights and freedoms of the person and citizen are considered. According to the author there was now an unsatisfactory situation in the sphere of the rights and freedoms of the person and citizen, increases the number of violations of the rights and freedoms that leads to increase in social tension and loss of trust of the population to all structures of the government. In this connection in article improvement of mechanisms of ensuring with bodies of prosecutor’s office of the rights and freedoms of the person and citizen is proved by need of definition of coordination activity of prosecutor’s office, from the point of view of her potential and a role in fight against crime also.

scholarly journals Essay on the Doctrine of Administrative Procedure

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 11-22
Author(s):  
L. L. Popov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
High Speed ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Russian Science ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Administrative Courts

The paper elucidates the history and current state of the administrative procedure doctrine, the idea of the structure of the administrative procedural code of the Russian Federation, shows the role Prof. Nadezhda G. Salishcheva and Prof. Valentin D. Sorokin plaid in the development of the theory of administrative procedure. The author highlights that the first link of administrative procedural activity and the structure of administrative procedural law have been created. The second link, namely, the creation of the Administrative Procedural Code of the Russian Federation has been completed. The third link that involves the recognition by the legal scientific community of the fact that, in the system of Russian law, administrative procedural law does exist, has taken place. And, according to strict logic, there is a need for the fourth final link in the system of administrative procedural activity, namely: the creation of an all-Russian system of administrative courts, which will require a financial basis, the availability of human resources and a modern digital infrastructure, including a unified all-Russian database of citizens and organizations brought to administrative responsibility qualified according to the constituent entity of the Russian Federation and fields (areas) of management, high-speed Internet connection with all local jurisdictional authorities. And as we can see, the system of administrative courts will meet the needs of two branches of state power — the executive branch and the judiciary.The author expresses the wish that curious scientists — administrative law experts — appear in Russian science, who would be interested in the considered scientific issue that constitutes an interesting and very important problem and proceeds researching the theory, legislation and practice of the administrative procedure.

scholarly journals On Legal Basis of a Claim

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 107-116
Author(s):  
V. N. Ivakin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
General Concept ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Grounds

The science of civil procedural law advances an opinion that it is necessary to distinguish between the  factual and legal basis of a claim. The latter needs to be singled out, since the specific claim always results from a  specific legal relationship, from the subjective right of the plaintiff to be protected. The main argument, according to  A. A. Dobrovolskiy, is not the presence of the relevant norm in the law but its practical necessity to recognize these  legal grounds as an integral part of a claim. However, the author here confuses two different issues: the expediency  and the obligatory existence of a legal basis for the claim, although in fact these are far from identical concepts.  The author also wrongfully identifies the concepts of "basis of a claim" and "basis of satisfaction of a claim", as  a result of which the legal basis of a claim is always included in the basis of a claim. This position is supported by  some other scientists who dealt with the problems of the claim (G. L. Osokina, O. V. Isaenkova). Meanwhile, if we  consider a claim as a legal phenomenon in general, then the legal basis is indeed a necessary component of the  general concept of “the basis of a claim”. However, if we turn to specific claims, then the legal basis of the claim  can be either optional (Code of Civil Procedure of the RSFSR 1964) or mandatory (Code of Civil Procedure of the  Russian Federation 2002). Currently, in accordance with paragraph 4, Part 2 of Art. 131 of the Civil Procedural Code  of the Russian Federation, the statement of claim must indicate what constitutes the violation or threat of violation  of the rights, freedoms or legitimate interests of the plaintiff. The paper draws attention to the shortcomings of  this norm, and thus suggests to remove it from the Civil Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. At the end of  the paper, it is suggested that with the development of civil procedural legislation, reference to the norms of law  in a statement of claim will become mandatory. However, the recognition by V. V. Yarkov of this provision as valid  by virtue of imposing the burden of proof on the parties seems to be unreasoned.

scholarly journals Administrative legal mechanism for exercising the right of citizens to appeal to the government bodies in the Ural Federal District: the peculiarities of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
pp. 32-46
Author(s):  
Stanislav Vladimirovich Kalashnikov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Mechanism

The subject of this this research is the normative legal and legal acts of the government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation included into the Ural Federal District (Kurgan, Sverdlovsk, Tyumen, Chelyabinsk regions, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, Ugra and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug) that regulate the administrative legal mechanism for exercising the right of citizens to appeal to the government bodies in the indicated regions. Special  attention is given to the importance and need for legal regulation of the issues associated with arranging additional guarantees and exercising the right of citizens to appeal to government bodies, particularly on the level of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation included into the Ural Federal District. Based on the comprehensive analysis of the aforementioned normative legal act and legal acts, the author reveals the peculiarities of legal regulation of the administrative legal mechanism for exercising the right of citizens to appeal to government bodies in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation included into the Ural Federal District, the limits of norm-setting authorities of the listed regions of the Russian Federation, specificities of securing additional guarantees of the rights of citizens to appeal to government bodies in the corresponding regional laws, approaches towards consolidation of the categorical and conceptual apparatus, determination of parties to legal relations in the area of exercising the right of citizens to appeal to government bodies, the role of normative legal and legal acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation included into the Ural Federal District within the mechanism of exercising the right of citizens to appeal to government bodies. The conclusion is formulated on the prospect of the approaches of certain constituent entities of the Russian Federation towards legal regulation of the mechanism for exercising the right of citizens to appeal government. The author also makes recommendation for its improvement.

ON THE NATURE OF RELATIONSHIPS FOR RECONCILIATION AND THE DESIRABILITY OF THEIR REGULATION IN CIVIL PROCEDURAL CODES

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-131
Author(s):  
S.S. KAZIKHANOVA
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
The Relationship

The article analyzes the changes made to the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation by the Federal Law of 26 July 2019 No. 197-FZ, related to the regulation of conciliation procedures. The question is raised as to whether the civil procedural codes should regulate relations on reconciliation and to what extent. Agreement is expressed with those authors who believe that, by their nature, the relations that develop in conciliation procedures between its participants (including in cases where the conciliation procedure is directed by a judge) are not procedural and are not part of the subject of civil procedural law. The non-procedural nature of the relationship between the judicial conciliator and the court in the procedure of judicial conciliation under the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Administrative code of the Russian Federation is substantiated. It is concluded that due to the qualitatively different nature of reconciliation relations from civil procedural relations, as well as their lack of connection with the resolution of a civil case in a certain system of guarantees (civil procedural form), there is no place for articles on individual conciliation procedures among procedural norms. In this regard, it is proposed to either exclude them, or, as an option, transfer them to the appendix to the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Administrative code of the Russian Federation (just as in the Civil Procedure Code of 1964 there was an appendix, in particular, about the arbitration court).

scholarly journals Problems Encountered by Judges of the Courts of General Jurisdiction in Preparing for the Examination of Administrative Offenses

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-38
Author(s):  
N. A. Nobel
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Current Code

The paper is devoted to the issues raised by judges of courts of general jurisdiction in the process of preparation for the consideration of administrative offenses. The author highlights the substantive and formal side of the procedural activity of the judge of the court of general jurisdiction at this stage. The current Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences, unlike other procedural codes, carries out fragmentary legal regulation of this issue. The Code on Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation does not contain provisions on the possibility of appealing against (challenging of) the judge’s determination concerning referral of an administrative offense case to proper jurisdiction. The author, on the basis of constitutional provisions, jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, argues the stance that determinations on the transfer of administrative cases to proper jurisdiction are subject to an independent appeal (challenge). It is proposed to supplement Art. 29.4 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation with provisions stipulating an opportunity for interested persons to appeal (to challenge) the determinations concerning referral of administrative offenses to proper jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Functional Aspect of a Protocol on Administrative Offense as a Jurisdictional Act

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-54
Author(s):  
I. V. Tymoshenko
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Functional Aspect ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Administrative Jurisdiction ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Penalty ◽  
Functional Purpose

In June 2019, the official website of the Government of the Russian Federation published the Concept of the New Code of Administrative Offences, the enactment of which is planned for 1 January 2021. This Concept indicates that the factors that reduce the effectiveness of the existing Administrative Code of the Russian Federation include, among other things, problems in law enforcement at the stages of initiation and consideration of cases of administrative offenses, contains general guidelines for reforming the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation and highlights certain challenging issues that need to be resolved in its forthcoming modernization. At the same time, it does not seem to address all the issues that need to be addressed. Thus, the analysis of administrative-jurisdictional practice of the first instance shows that the protocol on administrative offense is considered by subjects of administrative jurisdiction ( extrajudicial, quasi-judicial, and judicial) as one of the types of evidence in the case of an administrative offence. Moreover, it is not uncommon that such a record is the only evidence on the basis of which an administrative penalty is imposed. And the analysis of administrative and jurisdictional practice of the second and subsequent instances (up to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation) allows us to conclude that this approach is justified and quite legitimate. But is it really true? And to what extent is it lawful and legitimate to consider the protocol on an administrative offense as evidence in the case of an administrative offense? This paper is devoted to searching for answers to these questions through the prism of understanding of the functional purpose and juridical (lawful) nature of this type of administrativejurisdictional acts.

scholarly journals Public Prosecution in the System of Criminal Procedural Functions

2019 ◽  
pp. 183-193
Author(s):  
V. N. Isaenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Semantic Content ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

The paper discusses the concept and types of criminal procedural functions, analyzes the points of view of legal scholars who at various times formulated the corresponding definition. According to the author, the semantic content set by the legislator is set forth in Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation is an important contribution to the improvement of the conceptual apparatus of criminal procedural law; it is intended to ensure uniformity of interpretation of the concepts they designate and, consequently, uniformity of action of the relevant criminal procedure institutions. At the same time, the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation has no definition of the concept of criminal procedure function. Based on the analysis of the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation and the opinions of jurists who expressed opinions on the concept of the criminal procedure function, it is proposed to include an additional clause in Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation that would contain this concept in the proposed edition of the author. It is also proposed to divide the criminal procedural functions into two groups in connection with their performance by the participants of the criminal process both at the pre-trial and at the trial stages. The opinion is expressed on the independent nature of the function of assisting criminal proceedings carried out by its other participants, referred to in Ch. 8 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. The content of the function of supporting public prosecution as a form and stage of criminal prosecution and its place in the system of other criminal procedure functions are analyzed. The author proposes a definition of the concept of public prosecution, which is considered as a necessary element and at the same time as a special form of the function of the prosecution in criminal proceedings. This activity differs significantly in terms of tasks, subject and conditions of execution from the accusatory activities of the investigating officer, investigator, body of inquiry in pre-trial proceedings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document