scholarly journals CORRELATION BETWEEN THE RULES OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND OTHER LEGAL ACTS: LAW, THEORY, LEGAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND COURT PRACTICE

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
O. S. Golovachuk ◽  
A. D. Proshlyakov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Practice

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 Legality and Validity of Property Seizure in the Investigation of a Criminal Case

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 118-126
Author(s):  
O. A. Malysheva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
First Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Lawsuits ◽  
The Russian Federation

The importance of the measure of procedural coercion in the form of seizure of property increases against the background of the high amount of damage caused by crimes, namely about 550 billion rubles annually. This measure of procedural coercion has a high security potential in order not only to satisfy claims in civil lawsuits, but also to recover a fine and other property claims provided for in Part 1 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Investigators (interrogators) annually initiate the seizure of property about 40 thousand times. 90% of cases are a success. The application of this measure is accompanied by the restriction of the property rights of both natural and legal persons, including those who are not recognized as a civil defendant in a criminal case, in the first case, and the accused (suspect).The seizure of property in criminal procedure practice is accompanied by the need for the investigator to overcome a number of difficulties, which are caused, firstly, by the intersectoral nature of the regulation of this legal institution; secondly, by the presence of gaps in the regulation of relations arising in connection with the imposition of this arrest; thirdly, by the inconsistency of the objectives of proof to establish the nature and amount of damage caused by a crime and the implementation of security activities in a criminal case. This gives rise to numerous violations of the legality and validity of the seizure of property on the part of not only the investigator, but also the court, despite the expression of a number of positions of the ECHR on this issue, despite the explanations of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.The author concludes that without the release of the investigator as a subject of proof in a criminal case from performing an unusual function — providing compensation for property penalties in a criminal case — it is impossible to achieve the full legality and validity of the seizure of property.

Law enforcement practice in the field of budget: theoretical-legal and judicial-arbitration aspects

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hristina Peshkova ◽  
Vladimir Pachkun
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Financial Control ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Educational Organizations ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The monograph examines the practical aspects of the application of the budget legislation of the Russian Federation in judicial practice — the practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and arbitration courts, as well as the functions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the interpretation of budget legislation. The article analyzes the theoretical and legal provisions of law enforcement activities in the field of the budget, as well as the categories of budget and legal science. For legal scientists, graduate students, students of legal educational organizations, as well as practitioners of courts, financial control bodies and other state and municipal institutions.

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 Extradition under the Legislation of the Russian Federation and Member States of the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (65) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Elena A. Kupryashina ◽  
Snezhana S. Khalimonenko ◽  
Aleksander A. Nasonov ◽  
Ekaterina A. Novikova ◽  
Sergey F. Shumilin
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Russian Federation

The document analyzes the legislation of the Russian Federation and the member states of the European Union on extradition from the point of view of its compliance with the current European Convention on Extradition. It also makes proposals to improve the rules of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that regulates the extradition procedure. Methodologically, the work uses scientific methods of analysis and synthesis, as well as the historical, comparative method, all in an integrated approach. Among the conclusions, the fact that for the previous legal provisions to work, its consolidation only in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation is insufficient. The first step to put them into practice could be to discuss the issue of making the necessary amendments to the Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil Matters, as well as in the Family and Criminal Affairs regulations of January 22, 1993, of which the countries of the European Convention on Extradition are parties.

scholarly journals Grounds for Canceling Seizure in Pre-Trial Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 228-233
Author(s):  
Boris B. Bulatov ◽  
◽  
Alexander S. Dezhnev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Lawsuits ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the normative legal basis of the grounds for canceling property seizure in pre-trial criminal proceedings. The problem of the legislator’s usage of evaluative categories in removing investigator’s, interrogator’s or court’s restrictions is also analyzed. The solution of this problem is made dependent on the implementation of public or private interests. Discussing these issues, the authors come to the conclusion that this sphere is neither presented nor analyzed in academic monographic works. This circumstance indicates the novelty of the study owing to the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the issue. The conclusion about the priority of public principles over private interests concerning matters which are not related to civil lawsuits is made on the grounds of empirical data and the analysis of legislative approaches. The contradictions of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation regulating the basis and procedure for canceling property seizure and the laws on bankruptcy are identified. The directions for improving the legal regulation of these issues are presented. The necessity of a multisectoral regulation of some aspects of law enforcement is inferred. The examination of private principles in canceling property seizure is connected with securing a civil lawsuit in criminal proceedings. The authors substantiate the existence of additional opportunities in making decisions in this field via the legal regime. This regime is also used in some other legal acts and may be put into practice in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. However, the imposed restrictions can be canceled on the basis of the decision by a person considering a criminal case. The authors note the incoherence of some provisions of Part 3 and Part 9 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. This incoherence is connected with different approaches to the view on public and private interests in decision making. The authors substantiate the necessity of a legal linking of grounds for canceling property seizure with the decision on imposing this resriction. The conclusion about the comprehensive order of property seizure is made in the final part of the article. It is also stated that this order does not contain distinct criteria of the legality of the decision. Certain parts of the criminal procedure laws should be corrected. Some ways to improve the field of legal regulation concerning the opportunity of canceling seizure are given.

scholarly journals THE IMPACT OF LEGISLATION THE ANGLO-SAXON LEGAL SYSTEM ON THE REFORM OF THE RUSSIAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 178-184
Author(s):  
T. K. Ryabinina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The United States ◽  
Anglo Saxon ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Impact

The article discusses issues concerning the impact of legislation some countries Anglo-Saxon legal family on contemporary reform of Russian criminal procedure. The author raises the problem of community many of the legal provisions and institutions of Russian and Anglo-Saxon law. The work focuses on the fact that due to frequent legal stories, contradictory law-enforcement practice, the active work of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation which, by their individual decisions initiate new legislative changes, the reference to comparative legal study of foreign models of the criminal process is inevitable. The study used General scientific and special legal methods of studies: analysis and synthesis, legal modeling, formally-legal. The scientific novelty of the research lies in the author's approach to the study of the problem, which has not only theoretical but also practical importance, consists in the fact that, despite the seemingly opposite type of the Russian legal system related to civil law jurisdictions, and countries of the Anglo-American conglomerate, however, in fact, at the present time, there is the mutual influence and complementarity. In support of this thesis, the author made analysis of such a legal institution as a simplified procedure (in countries with Anglo-Saxon legal family called plea of guilt), which is in the form of a special order of judicial proceedings was introduced in the Russian criminal process. The Russian version of this procedure differs from Anglo-American, however, at its core, it is based on the legislative regulations of great Britain and the United States. The work is concluded that the main influence in Anglo-Saxon law is in the Russian criminal process is manifested in the extension of adversarial origins.

scholarly journals Appealing against Decisions on Reimbursement of Procedural Costs Made in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 131 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 155-166
Author(s):  
S. R. Zelenin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Body ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedural Costs ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The One ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right

The legality and validity of the decisions of the investigator, inquirer and the prosecutor on the payment  of the amounts related to procedural costs remain problematic due to the absence in the law of a mechanism  ensuring the judicial procedure for their appeal.  In order to fill this gap, the author studies the possibilities of introducing a procedure similar to the one enshrined  in Art. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The paper analyzes the positions of the  Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 18-P dated May 13, 2021. It concerns the  victims’ appeal against the decisions of the investigator and the head of the investigative body regarding the  reimbursement of expenses for a representative. Some examples of judicial practice for resolving other disputes  related to the reimbursement of procedural costs are also analyzed.  It is concluded that the right of a person claiming to receive the amounts provided for in Part 2 of Art. 131 of the  Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation against a judicial appeal made at his request is universal  and does not depend either on his status in a criminal case, or on the type of the indicated amounts, or on the  body or official that made the contested decision.  Taking into account the practice of applying other norms on appealing against decisions of the investigating  bodies, it was proposed to introduce Art. 125.2. The author formulate its content given the characteristics of the  participants in the proceedings and the powers of the court to resolve the complaint.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document