scholarly journals Features of criminal procedure evidence carried out by the investigator, in the context of digitalization of criminal proceedings

Author(s):  
O. A. Malysheva

The article focuses on the change in the rules of criminal procedure evidence, due to the increasingly active introduction of digital technologies in the criminal procedure sphere. Taking into account the foreign experience of initiating and investigating criminal cases in digital format, the article clarifies promising areas of digitalization of Russian criminal proceedings. Means that prevent the investigator from violating the procedural form of evidence when using digital technologies in criminal proceedings are determined.

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2(64)) ◽  
pp. 113-122
Author(s):  
Елена Сергеевна ПАПЫШЕВА

The paper discusses the possibilities of digitalization of criminal procedure and its importance for optimizing prosecutorial supervision, including high-tech supervision. The development of digital technologies urgently requires not only legal changes, but also the rational use of artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings. Purpose: to determine the limits of the use of artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings and, in particular, prosecutorial supervision. Methods: the author uses empirical methods of comparison and description; theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic. A special scientific legal-technical method is also applied. Results: The prosecutor’s access to the materials of the criminal case will make it possible to ensure the continuity of prosecutorial supervision and will enhance its efficiency. The use of software will be a factor preventing the gathering of evidence in violation of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. It is proposed to use special methods of supporting public prosecution in specific types of criminal cases in the development of an artificial intelligence program.  Digital technologies can be used to analyze crimes, its causes and conditions, and to develop effective means of preventing it when the prosecutor exercises the function of coordinating the activities of law enforcement agencies in combating crime.


Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 117-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. I. Sheremetev

The paper deals with topical issues related to the use of digital technologies in criminal proceedings. The author presents the directions of digitization of the court and the principles of using artificial intelligence, formulated by the bodies of the Council of Europe. The stages of the emergence of individual digital technologies first in the work of arbitration courts, and later — courts of general jurisdiction are shown. Existing and promising digital technologies are considered as the criminal case moves, after its submission in court from the Prosecutor. Considerable attention is given to the order of formation of the court for the consideration of a particular criminal case. The author analyzes the difficulties encountered in the use of an automated information system in this matter, and proposes ways to resolve them. The author considers it necessary to use e-mail to call victims, witnesses and other participants in the proceedings, for which he proposes to make appropriate changes to the current procedural legislation. The article reveals the current procedure and prospects for the use of video conferencing systems, audio and video recording of the trial in the criminal process. The author reports on the experimental development of speech recognition programs for participants in the trial. Special attention is given to the achievements in the implementation of digital technologies in the Moscow courts, implemented in the course of the international project «Support for judicial reform». In this regard, the author describes the creation of electronic copies of traditional «paper» cases in the courts of Moscow, making the proceedings more open.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
E. V. Smakhtin

The article deals with the peculiarities of the activity of courts in making judicial decisions in the context of a pandemic. First of all, we are talking about the wider use of digital and information technologies in criminal proceedings, which have previously been repeatedly recommended by forensic science for implementation in judicial practice. Some recommendations of criminalistics are currently accepted by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its Decision dated April 08, 2020 № 821 and Review on certain issues of judicial practice related to the application of legislation and measures to counteract the spread of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in the territory of the Russian Federation № 2, which provided appropriate explanations for their use in practice. In particular, we are talking about the possibility of using video conferencing systems for certain categories of criminal cases and materials that are considered urgent, although this is not provided for in criminal procedure legislation. It is concluded that it is necessary to change the current criminal procedure legislation, bring it into line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws, federal laws and subordinate regulatory legal acts, including orders of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.


Author(s):  
E.F. Tensina

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.


De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Debora Valkova-Terzieva ◽  

The subject of this research is a specific prerequisite for the termination of criminal proceedings in public criminal cases, regulated in Article 24, Paragraph 1, Item 5 of the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure. This analysis was necessitated by the fact that the European Union had introduced certain obligations for the Member States.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 682
Author(s):  
Arman SAKHARBAY ◽  
Askar Kadyrovich KALIYEV ◽  
Moldir Saparbekkyzy BAIKOMUROVA

The research analyzes the possible application and effectiveness of a monetary penalty as one of the most useful sanctions to maintain the established order of criminal justice, as well as develops constructive proposals to improve the criminal procedure legislation based on the conducted survey. To this end, the authors of the article have studied the criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan and legislation on administrative offenses, considered scientific opinions presented in numerous publications on relevant topics and conducted a comparative analysis of regulatory systems in Kazakhstan, Germany, Austria, the USA and the UK. As a result, the authors have established that one of the main reasons hindering the adequate implementation of criminal justice is the violation of obligations to participate in criminal proceedings by persons named in the Criminal Procedure Code of Kazakhstan. To maintain procedural discipline, the court is provided with ample opportunities in the form of coercive measures, including a monetary penalty. The authors have investigated the legal nature of a monetary penalty and compared it with administrative fines. The authors have considered grounds and application procedures for this sanction in the criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan and some foreign legal systems. The authors have determined the problems of its implementation caused by the slovenly legislation of a monetary penalty that impedes law enforcement activity. A comprehensive analysis allows developing proposals for improving the use of monetary penalties as measures of coercion for criminal cases heard in the court. If these proposals are enshrined in the existing regulatory framework and put into practice, they will strengthen the discipline of parties to criminal proceedings, ensure the strict observance of criminal proceedings and increase their general effectiveness. Due to its conclusions and proposals, the article demonstrates the novelty of the conducted research, the authors' original approach to the analysis of information and innovative ways to improve the existing legislative framework.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 96-105

Investigation of crimes against justice in Ukraine is among topical problems of miscarriage of justice. Hundreds of criminal cases are recorded as a crime in the Official Register in Ukraine but only a few have been brought to the court. In this article we try to approach this problem in three ways: from the point of view of criminal law, criminal procedure and criminalistic measures of counteraction to miscarriage of justice. Such an approach helps to demonstrate problems of investigator, prosecutor and judge at different stages of criminal proceeding. Special attention is paid to specific regulation of the issues of criminal proceedings against a certain category of persons, including judges. Mistakes of representatives of law enforcement bodies become visible as a result of analyzing of real criminal cases. Such an analysis is aimed to disclose the problem of counteraction to miscarriage of justice in Ukraine.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 350-355
Author(s):  
A. Kalygulova

The article is devoted to the issue of classification of the powers of an investigating judge in criminal proceedings of the Kyrgyz Republic. The relevance and novelty of the study is caused by the introduction of a new procedural figure of the investigating judge, who exercises judicial control in pre-trial proceedings. The powers conferred by the Criminal Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic to an investigating judge are varied in content. In this regard, the issue of the classification of the powers of an investigating judge is relevant. Object of research: the procedural figure of the investigating judge. The subject of the research: the powers of the investigating judge and their division by classification. Thus, the powers of an investigating judge, provided for in Article 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic, cover not only the issues of the existence of grounds for the application and extension of measures to ensure criminal proceedings, authorization of investigative and special investigative actions, as well as the resolution of issues arising between the participants in pre-trial proceedings, including those affecting the scope of proof in criminal cases. A proposal has been made to classify the powers of an investigating judge in criminal proceedings in the Kyrgyz Republic.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-208
Author(s):  
A. V. Boyarskaya

The subject of study is the criminal-legal basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling when the accused person agrees with the charge. These issues are relevant, since in July 2020 the substantive legal basis of the expedited procedure in Russia was changed and now this procedure can only be applied in criminal cases of small and medium gravity.The aim of this work is to study the substantive legal basis of an expedited procedure of litigation from the point of view of the changes were made to it. The author expresses the thesis that the legislators did not quite reasonably link criminal-legal grounds of the expedited procedure with the system of categories of crimes.The methodology. The author used general scientific methods (dialectical, historical, methods of formal logic, system analysis) as well as method of formal legal interpretation of Russian Criminal Code and judicial decisions of Russian courts.The main results, scope of application. The criminal and legal basis of certain criminal procedure is a package of criminal law standards, for the implementation of which a certain criminal and procedural form is intended. The parameters of the substantive basis of criminal proceedings are set with the signs that shall be indicated in the Code of Criminal Procedure and may change. It directly refers to the expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling, by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code. Initially, it was assumed that the application of this procedure is permissible in criminal cases concerning crimes the punishment for which does not exceed 5 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code. The expedited court proceedings began to be applied in criminal cases concerning crimes, the punishment for which does not exceed 10 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code, since 2003. The Russian Supreme Court made an attempt to reduce the application of court proceedings provided by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code in 2019. It turned out to be successful. Legislators have changed the basic criterion that determines the substantive basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling. Now the system of categories of crimes is this basis. The system of categories of crimes presented in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is not stable enough and is based on a set of provisions of this Code, but the sanctions for many crimes are not scientifically and practically grounded in this Code. In addition, the classification of crimes enshrined in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is based on such a criterion as the nature and degree of public danger of the crime. These categories are among the most complex in the science of criminal law.Conclusions. The use of categories of crimes as a criterion for determining the criminal legal basis of the expedited procedure for making a court decision significantly complicates the application of the expedited procedure.


Author(s):  
Tatyana Ryabinina

The article deals with current and controversial issue in the criminal science, specifically the need for the Russian criminal justice process to have an institute to return a criminal case to the procurator at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court hearing. The author emphasizes that during the continuance of RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure, a special emphasis was put on it as a guarantee of the delivery of justice and the rights of the participants in the proceedings, that put in place the arrangements necessary for an effective court trial. The goal of modern judicial reform is to establish an independent judiciary whose main function is the delivery of justice which can be implemented in criminal proceedings only in adversary criminal proceedings. Since the beginning of its implementation, attitudes towards the institution of returning a criminal case by a court to a procurator to correct lacunae, loopholes, contradictions, irregularities or flaws in pre-trial proceedings have changed dramatically. It is perceived as an attribute of the courts prosecutorial activities, which is inconsistent with its new role as an independent body to resolve legal disputes between a state and an individual awaiting for a founded and equitable decision from the court. Despite critical rhetoric towards the institution of returning the criminal case to the prosecutor, the author argues that it is necessary due to specific status of the first judicial phase in a staged system of Russian criminal justice process. This institute creates conditions for monitoring and verification activities of judges at this stage, and the corresponding authority of judges to determine the future course of criminal cases brought before the courts. However, the author concludes that the task of rectifying the shortcomings of the prosecution can be addressed at the preliminary hearing introduced by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to resolve various contentious issues. When it is impossible to remove the obstacles that prevent the court from conducting a trial, the judge may, taking into account the views of the parties, decide to return the case to the prosecutor.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document