scholarly journals Matters related to Court Session Scheduling and Choice of Court Procedure in Criminal Proceedings: Problems, Errors, and Solutions

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 112-124
Author(s):  
A. Yu. Safronov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Trial ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Punishment ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Will ◽  
Judicial Errors

The paper considers one of the key stages of court work in criminal proceedings, namely the initial preparation stage for a court session in a criminal trial and scheduling of the said session while choosing the procedure rules (general or special, provided for in Chapter 40 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). The paper analyzes the latest changes in legislation regulating these issues, ambiguities and uncertainties that give rise to judicial errors made at this stage, including those related to the choice (determination) of the procedure for judicial proceedings, their impact on the future fate of the criminal case and the final court decision (sentence).Studying the cases of specific judicial precedents (including the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation), the author emphasizes the reasons these errors can be caused by. Examples of the actions of the parties (both the prosecution and the defense) that significantly affect this stage and even determine it, as well as the final court document, including in terms of criminal punishment, are given. The author shows that, at the will of only the prosecution (the state prosecutor and (or) the victim), the defendant (convicted), who conscientiously contributes to justice and fully admits his guilt at all stages of the investigation and judicial consideration of the criminal case, is deprived of the benefits provided to him by law (privileges in the appointment of criminal punishment), which even the judge (court) considering the criminal case cannot influence. The difficulties of the court (judge) in deciding on the choice of the procedure for trial in a criminal case and the legislative uncertainty in the issues under consideration are revealed. Specific ways of solving the problems under consideration of scheduling a court session in a criminal trial are proposed.

scholarly journals Referring a Case to the Highest Division of the Supreme Court in the Criminal Procedure Legislation of Ukraine and European Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-165
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Court Practice

The article aims to examine one of the elements of the formal mechanism of maintaining court practice unity in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and European countries – referring a case to the highest division of the Supreme Court. Similar to the Ukrainian criminal procedure legislation, the grounds for referring a criminal case and the procedure of its application are provided in the legislation of Estonia, Italy and Lithuania. At the same time, the Ukrainian legislator has established a number of special features, however, the wording of the relevant articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine is not perfect. The article provides answers to such questions as how forceful the provisions of criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine are, to what extent of effectiveness the Supreme Court exercises its legal authority regarding the unity of court practice in criminal proceedings, and whether the controversies in legal positions of the structural divisions of the Supreme Court have been successfully avoided. In order to achieve the stated aims, parts 2 and 3 are devoted to the examination of the grounds for referring a case in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and European countries. Part 4 outlines the shortcomings of the content of some articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine concerning the procedure of the referral of a criminal case to the highest division of the Supreme Court. Part 5 provides the analysis of the validity of decisions made by the boards of judges at the Supreme Court on the referral of criminal proceedings to its higher judicial divisions – the joint chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. On the basis of the study of the judgements of boards, the judicial chambers of the Criminal Cassation Court and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, in part 6 the question is answered on whether the Supreme Court of Ukraine managed to perform its duty on the assurance of court practice unity in such an area as criminal proceedings. Keywords: exclusive legal problem, development of law, formation of uniform law enforcement practice, the Supreme Court, criminal proceedings, Ukraine.

scholarly journals EGAL RELATIONS RELATED TO THE DEATH OF A WITNESS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (72) (2) ◽  
pp. 283-291
Author(s):  
A. A. Patrusheva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Trial ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Fact ◽  
Legal Consequences

The legal fact of the death of a witness in a criminal trial causes various legal consequences to occur. In cases where the witness, after being called to give evidence, was not questioned in connection with the death, these consequences are expressed in changing the methods and means of proof in the criminal case. In situations where the death of a witness occurred after interrogation, criminal procedural consequences may occur in the form of the reading of the deceased’s testimony, the evidentiary value of which is not lost if certain procedural conditions are met. Then the death of a witness acquires the property of an exclusive basis for limiting the oral proceedings and the adversarial nature of the parties in criminal proceedings, allowing the court to unconditionally resort to reading the testimony of the deceased.

Execution of a Sentence in the Structure of Criminal Proceedings: Procedural Stage or Special Court Proceedings?

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 97-106
Author(s):  
V. V. Nikolyuk ◽  
◽  
L. A. Pupysheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Self In Relation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Proceedings

The article analyzes the concept of execution of a sentence as an independent stage of the criminal process (the stage of criminal proceedings). Arguments are given that point to its certain illogicality and inconsistency. The authors on the basis of existing legislation and taking into account the positions of Plenum of the Supreme Court additionally reasoned and substantiated the thesis of the existence of the criminal process self in relation to a criminal case of criminal procedure, regulated by Chapter 47 of the Code of criminal procedure.

scholarly journals HARMONIZATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AS A MEANS OF ENSURING THEIR UNIFORM APPLICATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 509-514
Author(s):  
D.V. Tat'yanin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Red Tape ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Different Content

The law of criminal procedure contains a number of rules with different content, which raises a number of questions in their interpretation and application. Decisions made using rules with different content lead to their appeal, often to annulment, which does not ensure the achievement of the appointment of criminal proceedings, but leads to unjustified red tape in criminal proceedings and the delay in making final decisions on them. The need to harmonize criminal procedure rules is related to ensuring high-quality and effective criminal proceedings, ensuring the protection of the rights of participants in criminal proceedings, the quality of the evidence process, both in pre-trial and judicial proceedings. The article addresses the problems of unification of criminal procedure rules containing such concepts as an investigator and urgent investigative actions. It is proposed to eliminate the contradictions in them in order to ensure their uniform application. The introduction of a single concept of investigator and refusal to use the profession of "forensic investigator" in this concept is justified, it is proposed to expand the number of participants who have the right to carry out urgent investigative actions, as well as to assign to them investigative actions carried out at the stage of initiating a criminal case.

scholarly journals Proceeding the prosecutor’s waiver: between law and reality

2021 ◽  
pp. 6-11
Author(s):  
Tatiana Vizdoaga ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Driving Force ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Trial ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Law ◽  
Core Issues ◽  
Trial Phase ◽  
Do So

The prosecution is the driving force behind the criminal proceedings. By presenting the prosecution with all his energy, insistence and competence, the prosecutor is obliged to do so only to the extent that the guilt is proven, taking into account the evidence supporting the defendant’s position. The prosecutor himself is obliged to strictly observe the law, to oppose any abuses and violations, regardless of the party whose interests are harmed. For the prosecutor, supporting the accusation is not an end in itself; or, the well-founded waiver of the accusation, as well as the support of the accusation, equally contribute to the achievement of the purpose of the criminal trial. This study discusses certain core issues related to the waiver of the state accuser to charge the trial phase of the criminal case.

scholarly journals Dispositivity principle in the criminal procedure of Azerbaijan Republic: concept and application in individual rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 504-520
Author(s):  
Gahraman V. Jafarov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
The Will ◽  
Main Determinants ◽  
Procedural Rights

Unlike other principles of criminal procedure (such as legality, presumption of innocence, etc.), the principle of dispositivity (the principle of autonomy of the will of a participant in the proceedings) does not have an independent legal formula, enshrined in a separate article in the current criminal procedure legislation of Azerbaijan. In this regard, questions about the existence, concept, content, individual elements, manifestations, and scope of the principle are becoming relevant and at the same time highly disputable. The author aims to determine the essence of dispositivity, to consider its individual manifestations, as well as to develop scientifically sound recommendations for optimizing the application in practice of the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure in regulating issues related to the dispositive basis of the criminal process. The set goals predetermined solution for such basic issues as study of the philosophical and legal concept of dispositivity; determination of determinants-manifestations of dispositivity in criminal proceedings as a whole; recognition of dispositivity as one of the autonomous principles of the modern criminal process of Azerbaijan. The study was conducted by methods of dialectical cognition based on the principles of reflection, comprehensiveness, unity of induction and deduction, determinism, contradiction, and unity of analysis and synthesis. The author has studied and summarized a great deal of doctrinal material and jurisprudence, and some selected judicial acts have been used as real models for casuistry of the issues addressed in the article. As a result of the study, the author substantiates that, despite the absence of an independent article in the CPC on this principle, dispositivity is an autonomous principle of criminal procedure, not covered by other principles; on the contrary, it enters into various correlative relations with them. In other words, the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide a binding feature of the principle of criminal procedure. As the main determinants of the principle under study, the author proposes to consider a system of procedural rights of non-governmental participants in the proceedings that have the effect of initiating some kind of proceedings, and the consent of a participant category, which is a mandatory condition in the procedural decision-making mechanism of entities with power.

scholarly journals Legal Framework of the Mechanism for the Elimination of Judicial Errors in Germany: A Comparative Legal Aspect

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 124-132
Author(s):  
A. G. Trofimik
Keyword(s):  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Judicial Errors ◽  
Assessment Of Evidence

The paper examines the legally enshrined principles of material truth (§ 244 II StPO) and free assessment of evidence (§ 261 StPO), as well as the doctrinal requirement for a comprehensive, complete and objective study of the circumstances of a criminal case from the standpoint of the legal mechanism for identifying and eliminating (eliminating) judicial errors in criminal proceedings in Germany. The meaning and functions of the named concepts for criminal proceedings have been determined. The influence of the principle of material truth (Untersuchungsgrundsatz, Aufklärungspflicht) and the principle of free evaluation of evidence on law enforcement are analyzed. Based on the analysis of the universal regulatory framework of the elimination of judicial errors and the corresponding judicial practice, comparing the current legal regulation of Germany with the Soviet criminal process, the author formulates hypotheses on the possibility of returning to the domestic criminal procedural law of truth as a special legal structure that guarantees the quality of the investigation of the circumstances of the criminal case and ensuring uniform judicial practice.

scholarly journals Court Discretion as Part of the Criminal Procedure Paradigm Structure

Legal Concept ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 166-173
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Azarova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Goals And Objectives

Introduction: the fundamental rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution are accordingly reflected in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. For more than fifteen years of the Code of Criminal Procedure application, the legislator has made about three hundred amendments that have increased its ambiguity and inconsistency. The very construct of its provisions is being built and in progress without a planned scientific and theoretical component of such building, without taking into account the empiricism of application. The Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR was used as a constructive basis for the new law, where the stages of criminal process are the fundamental structure of the law. The presence and introduction of new types of judicial proceedings and related institutions as an additional “load” caused the “deflection” of the entire structure of the Criminal Procedure Code, the consequence of which was the increase of unceasing contradictions between the goals and objectives of criminal proceedings, its general conceptual provisions and the criminal process immediate stages. The author sets the purpose of the study, which consists in the justification of contradictions in the law. Methods: the methodological framework consists of the methods of historicism, systematicity, and comparative law. Results: grounded in the work the author’s point of view is based on the knowledge in criminal law. Conclusions: the study revealed that the court discretion is an integral part of the criminal procedure paradigm structure, as the perception by the court of the “truth” of the circumstances to be proved in a criminal case, interpreted by the opposite parties of the adversarial process, is only possible through the prism of assessing these circumstances by the court at its discretion, during the verification of evidence in a particular criminal case.

scholarly journals Mistrust as Grounds for Recusation

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 139-147
Author(s):  
A. S. Taran
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Interpersonal Conflict ◽  
Defense Attorney ◽  
General Idea ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Traditionally, the grounds for recusation are objective circumstances established in the course of criminal proceedings, which exclude the participation of certain subjects in the trial, regardless of the discretion and expression of the will of the parties. The paper substantiates that "other circumstances giving grounds to believe that they are personally, directly or indirectly, interested in the outcome of this criminal case" provided for by Part 2 of Art. 61 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation as a basis for challenging a judge and other persons do not imply the mandatory establishment of interest, it is enough that there are circumstances giving grounds to believe its existence. It is in this interpretation of the law that the general idea underlying the institution of recusation is realized, i.e. ensuring confidence in the composition of the court. Ignoring mistrust in the composition of the court as a basis for recusation leads to violations of the law when resolving recusations in the event of an interpersonal conflict in court, when establishing a corporate relationship between a party and the composition of the court, when recalling a defense attorney, etc.

scholarly journals Possibilities for the Use of Information Obtained by Using Information and Technical Means and Means of Operative-Search Activities in Other Criminal Matters

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-93
Author(s):  
Zuzana Kurucová
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Slovak Republic ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Application Problem ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Media ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Open Question

Abstract Information that were obtained legally using information and technical means and means of operative-search activities have the nature of evidence in criminal proceedings. The nature of evidence is granted directly to this information, not to the media where they are recorded. In the case of legal use, this information has the nature of evidence in the criminal case, but the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code in the Slovak Republic contribute significantly to the detection and proving of serious criminal offences, because such information can be indirectly used also in other criminal case. Problematic is the fact that the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic adopted differing positions precisely on these options of the use of evidence in other criminal case, this dispute was also joined by the Prosecutor's office and this application problem has not been resolved even by the unifying opinion at the level of the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic. There is therefore still an open question from the point of argumentation and application, what evidence can be used also in other criminal cases or under what conditions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document