scholarly journals Discretionary Model of Legal Regulation of a Criminal Case and Criminal Prosecution Termination: Pro et Contra

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 214-222
Author(s):  
G. N. Kucherov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law

The paper discusses the issues of choosing the most effective model of criminal proceedings termination, analyzes the proposed in the scientific literature model of refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer when making an appropriate procedural decision. The author, based on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, studies the relationship between the principle of justice and the legality of procedural decisions to terminate a criminal case and criminal prosecution. The author concludes that the discretionary model of legal regulation of a criminal case and criminal prosecution termination is an effective means of achieving the purpose of criminal proceedings, allowing the law enforcement officer to make a fair decision, given the nature, degree of social danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission, information about the identity of the person who committed the crime. Refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer in the matter of terminating a criminal case will not only not contribute to the humanization of legislation, but will mark the victory of formalism over justice in criminal proceedings.

Objectification of the Amount of Compensation for Non-Pecuniary Damage in Claims Against Medical Organizations

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 35-44
Author(s):  
L. A. Shmarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Medical Assistance ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer

Based on the analysis of citizens’ claims against medical organizations, as well as on the basis of the analysis of the courts’ consideration of such claims, significant differences were found in the amount of compensation for non-pecuniary damage under various conditions related to both the condition of the victim of medical assistance rendered with defects and on the number of patients. It was shown that it is necessary to further accumulate material in order to obtain a more objective picture of satisfied claims and unification in the Russian Federation. Similar calculations can be carried out for other situations related to the possibility of causing moral harm, for example, disseminating information defaming the honor and dignity of a citizen, or compensating moral harm caused by unlawful actions of a law enforcement officer during criminal proceedings. Using the established average values, the court can, on the basis of established factual circumstances, calculate the amount of compensation for non-pecuniary damage in a particular case.

scholarly journals On the Need and Possible Options for Changing the Rules for Determining Forms of Guilt

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 87-102
Author(s):  
D. A. Kokotova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law

The current version of part 2 of article 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which appeared because of changes made to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in 1998, is rightly criticized for uncertainty. In the literature, various proposals are made to change the rules for determining the forms of guilt. The existing regulation needs adjusting, since it does not ensure the achievement of the initial goal of improving law enforcement, which was originally intended in part 2 of article 24, and does not comply with the principles of equality and legal certainty. The need to ensure compliance with these principles and achieve the original goal of the rule under consideration requires rejecting proposals to "legalize" the discretion of the law enforcement officer, the possibility of which arose due to the uncertainty of the current version of part 2 of article 24. Due to this uncertainty, compliance with the provisions of the Special part will not solve the existing problems. Unifying negligent crimes into a separate chapter, dividing the crimes in the existing chapters by paragraphs, depending on the form of guilt, is too difficult a way if we are talking about improving the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Clear automatic consolidation of the possibility of both forms of guilt does not provide the required differentiation of punishment.Restoring the original version of part 2 of article 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is an acceptable and easiest way, but there is a reason to believe that the rule changed in this way will fail to ensure that the law enforcement officer follows it. The inclusion of a form of guilt clause in the description of each body of a crime might be an effective means of limiting the discretion of the law enforcement officer, but this method is difficult to implement. It combines the features of these two methods of fixing the rule in the form of a list of crimes involving a particular form of guilt, by analogy with how the age at which criminal responsibility begins is now established.

scholarly journals Problems of Defining the Concept of «Change of Situation» in Art. 80.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
pp. 13-16
Author(s):  
Nadezhda Tydykova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Main Idea ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law ◽  
Clear Idea

The article discusses the concept of “change of situation” as the basis for release from punishment. The author adheres to the position of the need to use in the law only those concepts that are revealed through signs that are understandable to everyone. Article 80.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is examined as a norm that does not meet this criterion. The author claims that the content of this norm does not allow a clear idea of the content of the concept. As evidence, numerous examples from law enforcement practice are given, illustrating the inconsistancy of understanding the studied Institute of criminal law by investigative personnel and the judiciary. Each law enforcement officer, due to the lack of clear wording, is forced to interpret the norm independently, filling it with arbitrary content. This approach, of course, is unacceptable. Moreover, the interpretations often used are far from the main idea of the institution of release from punishment due to change in a situation and allow confusion or substitution of the term with other criminal law terms. In some cases, the courts consider it possible not to show specific circumstances at all, though they indicate a change in situation after the commission of the crime. Examples are given from practice where, instead of bringing arguments about change in situation, the law enforcement officer simply lists circumstances mitigating the punishment, names circumstances that should be taken into account when sentencing, names signs of active remorse or reconciliation with the victim. The author considers this state of affairs unacceptable and proposes, as alternative options for solving the problem, either introducing appropriate amendments to Article 80.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation to clarify the concept, or rejecting this institution of criminal law.

scholarly journals Public Prosecutor’s Inspection as a Guarantee of Compliance with the Law during Initiation of Criminal Proceedings

2017 ◽  
pp. 41-45
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Primary Method ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Compliance With The Law

The author states that the stage of initiation of criminal proceedings must serve as a barrier for unjustified criminal prosecution. It means that a significant role on this stage belongs to prosecutors. The primary method of enforcing the law is prosecutors’ inspection. However, a lack of appropriate legal regulation of prosecutors’ supervision in the Russian legislation on criminal procedure prevents effective application of prosecutors’ powers. A lack of systematic regulation of prosecutors’ inspection, legislative gaps and collisions result in significant inefficiency of the prosecutors’ supervision. The article sets out the results of the surveys conducted by the author among the employees of prosecutor’s offices. The majority of respondents found it necessary to define the «prosecutor’s inspection on compliance with law» in the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. Also it is essential that the reasons, motives and limits of prosecutors’ inspection in the stage of initiation of criminal proceedings are defined in the legislation.

scholarly journals SUBJECTS OF TRANSFER OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION (PROCEEDINGS) WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION. PART I. COURT AND THE PARTICIPANTS FOR THE PROSECUTION

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Kirill K. Klevtsov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Case Material ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Foreign State ◽  
The Russian Federation

In the article the author taking into account doctrinal sources and law enforcement practice, considers the subjects of legal relations (the court and the participants on the part of the prosecution) when sending a criminal case (material for checking a crime report) to a foreign state to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution or initiating a criminal case against a person, not subject to extradition to the Russian Federation. As a result, the author draws appropriate conclusions, both theoretical and applied.

scholarly journals ON THE DEFECTS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF THE CONCEPT OF LIABILITY FOR TAX OFFENCES

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 164-182
Author(s):  
Zhanna A. Nikolaeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The author analyzes the content of interrelated tax norms, administrative and criminal laws, which constitute the concept of liability for tax offences. The analysis makes it possible to identify the elements that cause non-compliance with the foundations of legal liability in criminal proceedings: its inevitability, equality of everyone before the law and the court, justice. Representatives of small and medium- sized businesses are placed in unequal, discriminatory circumstances in comparison with large businesses. In addition, the legislation on taxes and fees contains provisions which create obstacles for the operation of criminal and criminal procedure laws. Many instances of tax evasion, the non-payment of fees and/or insurance fees in large and especially large amounts revealed by tax services do not become known to investigative bodies. In this case, the principle of the priority of sectoral legislation ceases to work, since in criminal proceedings the provisions of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation cancel out the effect of the norms which are common to all types of crimes and express the foundations of a particular sector of law. This paper substantiates the need to improve the concept of liability for violations of the legislation on taxes and fees.

scholarly journals Meaning of the Category “Validity of the Charge” in Criminal Proceedings

2021 ◽  
pp. 218-223
Author(s):  
Oksana V. Kachalova ◽  
◽  
Viкtor I. Kachalov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Simplified Procedure ◽  
Special Order

The aim of the article is to identify the meaning of the category “validity of the charge” in criminal proceedings and the scope of its application. After analyzing the content and legal essence of this category, as well as procedural situations in which it is necessary to establish the validity of the charge, the authors come to the following conclusions. Any coercive measures against suspects and accused persons can be applied only if there are serious grounds to assume that a person is involved in the commission of a crime since the restriction of the most important constitutional rights of citizens who, by virtue of the presumption of innocence, are innocent of committing a crime is possible only in exceptional cases. The validity of the charge (suspicion) assumes that a person is involved in the commission of a crime, as well as the fact of the criminal prosecution of this person. It is established if there is sufficient evidence that a person may have committed a crime (a person was caught committing a crime or immediately after it was committed; the victim or witnesses identified the person as the perpetrator of the crime; obvious traces of the crime were found on the person or their clothing, with them or in their house, etc.). The validity of the charge may be confirmed by a decision to initiate a criminal case and bring a person as an accused, by protocols of detention, interrogations of the accused, the victim, witnesses, and other materials. In the procedural sense, the conditions for establishing the validity of the charge differ significantly. When resolving the issue of the use of detention and other preventive measures, the validity of the charge is established within the framework of a court session in the conditions of adversariality with the participation of the parties. When giving the court permission to conduct investigative and other procedural actions in accordance with Article 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, to ensure the secrecy of the investigation, the issue is resolved in the absence of adversariality with the possible participation of only the prosecutor, the investigator, and the inquirer. The category “validity of the charge” is significant in legal terms in a criminal case with the special order of proceedings. A prerequisite for the court to consider a criminal case in a simplified procedure is the validity of the charge and its confirmation by the evidence collected in the case. The validity of the charge in the appointment of a trial in the special order provided for by Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is established by the court outside the court session in the absence of the parties. In any of the above situations, the court is responsible for establishing the validity of the charge since failure to establish it means that the decision made is unfounded.

scholarly journals The subject of judicial control in consideration of complaints: controversial issues of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The purpose of this study was an attempt to theoretically understand the subject of judicial consideration of complaints against decisions, actions (inaction) of officials carrying out criminal prosecution. The research was carried out on the basis of comparative legal, formal logical, empirical, statistical methods. Judicial statistics for the year 2020 have been provided, and legislation has been studied from a historical and contemporary perspective, taking into account the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The problem is that, in practice, for about 20 years the courts have had difficulties in determining the subject of complaints, since neither in theory nor in practice a consensus has been developed on this issue. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation also does not contain a definition of the concept of «subject matter». The situation is aggravated by the presence of evaluative concepts in the text of the law, leading to a varied understanding of the subject of appeal by the courts, which leads to a violation of the constitutional rights of citizens at the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings. In the article, taking into account the analysis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, legislation and the opinion of scientists, a recommendation was made to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to specify the subject of consideration of complaints in accordance with Art. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in order to eliminate existing contradictions in practice and increase the level of protection of individual rights in pre-trial proceedings.

scholarly journals To the admissibility of the civil law exemption of property from arrest, imposed in the criminal proceedings: domestic and foreign experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-200
Author(s):  
Natalia Kashtanova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Protection

The subject of paper deals with the legal nature of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property.Methodological basis of the article is based on general scientific dialectical methods of cognitionof objective reality of the legal processes and phenomena that allowed us to conduct anobjective assessment of the state of legislation and law enforcement practice in the proceduralaspects of the cancellation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings of Russia.The results and scope of it’s application. It is submitted that the cancellation of the seizureof the property (or the individual limit) is allowed only on the grounds and in the mannerprescribed by the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. However, the studyfound serious contradictions in the application of the relevant law. In particular, cases inwhich the question of exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory),imposed in the criminal case was resolved in a civil procedure that, in the opinion of theauthor of the publication, is extremely unacceptable.On the stated issues topics analyzes opinions of scientists who say that the dispute aboutthe release of impounded property may be allowed in civil proceedings, including pendingresolution of the criminal case on the merits. The author strongly disagrees with this positionand supports those experts who argue that the filing of a claim for exemption of propertyfrom arrest (exclusion from the inventory) the reviewed judicial act of imposing of arrestwithout recognition per se invalid. In this regard, the author cites the legal position ofthe constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, from which clearly follows that of theright of everyone to judicial protection does not imply the possibility of choice of the citizenat its discretion, techniques and procedures of judicial protection, since the features of suchjudicial protection is defined in specific Federal laws.The author analyzes and appreciates Kazakhstan's experience of legal regulation of the permissibilityof filing a civil claim for exemption of property from seizure imposed in criminalproceedings. The author notes that the new civil procedural legislation of the Republic ofKazakhstan, which came into force from 01 January 2016, clearly captures that considerationin the civil proceedings are not subject to claims for exemption of property from seizureby the criminal prosecution body.Conclusions. Necessity of amendment to article 422 of the Civil Procedure Code of Russia:this article should not apply to cases of application of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property. Among other things, the author proposed additionsto part 9 of article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document