scholarly journals CRIMINAL PROSECUTION: THE PROBLEMS OF DEFINITION

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 142-145
Author(s):  
K. A. Talalaev

The author of the article uses historical and comparative legal research methods and studies the term criminal prosecution. The term criminal prosecution is compared with other similar concepts in the article. The author examines the historical process of formation of this concept. The author of the article will outline the content of the discussion about the term criminal prosecution. The modern definition of this term is not correct in the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. The author proposes a new definition of the term. Criminal prosecution is the procedural activity of the prosecution in order to expose a person of committing an act prohibited by the criminal law.

Author(s):  
Igor Antonov ◽  
Igor Alekseev

The authors use a communicative approach to the theory of law in their analysis of criminal procedure policy and its role in crime prevention. This approach allowed them to determine the content of criminal procedure work that lies outside the scope of criminal law. This content is its ability to regulate social conflicts of criminal law character. Within this framework, the criminal procedure is viewed as a platform for resolving social conflicts, the sides use it to resolve a conflict between them in socially acceptable ways in the process of communication. The involvement of the aggrieved party in the process of communication in connection with the crime intensifies the correctional impact of the criminal process and its significance for crime prevention. The authors suggest using simplified measures of criminal procedure law for reforming this process and basing it on the procedure of terminating a criminal case with the imposition of a court fine as a measure of criminal law influence. They suggest using the same approach when terminating a criminal case due to the reconciliation of the sides, with one exception: during the reconciliation of the sides, only grounds provided for in Art. 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be proven. If they are established, the investigator is obliged to petition to the court and the court, having established their validity, should decide to terminate the criminal case.


2021 ◽  
pp. 35-38
Author(s):  
Aleksey Yu. Gusev ◽  

The institution of exemption from criminal liability with the imposition of a court fine, introduced in 2016 into the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, has become widespread in investigative and judicial practice. The relatively short period of its application shows the need to eliminate conflicts and gaps in the norms governing these criminal procedural relations. The author uses the scientific and practical approach to analyze the judicial practice of considering cases related to the exemption of the accused (suspected) from criminal liability on the specified basis and proposes ways to eliminate the identified defects of the criminal procedure law in the following way: (1) the procedure for considering a criminal case in case of non-payment of a court fine can be optimized by the legislator: if the suspect (accused) fails to pay the court fine, the latter can be replaced with compulsory work, which, within under Chapter 51.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, should be considered as a measure of a criminal law nature; (2) the possibility of imposing a court fine after re-sending a criminal case to the court after fulfilling the requirements of Art. 446.5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation may be legally limited; (3) the assessment of compensation for damage caused by the accused (suspect) should be objective, that is, it should be determined by the court on the basis of the investigated evidence and the factual circumstances of the case, not be solely related to the subjective position of the victim about partially compensating for damage; (4) the period for consideration of this type of cases should be increased to 20 days; (5) there are a number of other defects in the norms of the institution in question.


Author(s):  
V. N. Isaenko

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.


Legal Concept ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 131-139
Author(s):  
Natalia Solovyova ◽  
Altyn Ilyasova

Introduction: in the paper the authors reveal the essence of one of the causes for initiating a criminal case, the socalled fourth cause with the title “the prosecutor’s decision to send relevant materials to the preliminary investigation body to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution”; actual problems associated with the implementation of the powers of the Prosecutor’s office at the stage of initiating a criminal case; the essence of the supervisory powers of the Prosecutor’s office (Prosecutor) at the stages of criminal proceedings. Addressing this topic is due to the main purpose – the consideration of the concept of “prosecutor’s decision as a cause for initiating a criminal case” in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, as well as the study of topical problems of implementing the powers of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) when considering the issue of ensuring compliance with the principle of legality at all the stages of criminal proceedings. Methods: the methodological framework for the study was the general scientific method of cognition, including the principle of objectivity, consistency, induction and deduction. In the context of this method and in connection with it, the general logical methods of theoretical analysis and specific scientific methods (comparative law, technical and legal analysis, concretization, interpretation) were used. Results: considering the concept of “prosecutor’s decision as a cause for initiating a criminal case”, the authors drew attention to the role of the prosecutor in making the relevant decision on the activity management of the preliminary investigation body, indicated, that in criminal procedure law of this state the most important function of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) is the supervision over compliance with rule of law by all the bodies and officials, by virtue whereof, in practice, the implementation of two mutually exclusive powers of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) can lead to the imbalance in the full implementation of the principles of criminal procedure at all procedural stages. Conclusions: as a result of the study, the authors come to the conclusion that in order to implement fair justice at the stages of criminal proceedings, it is necessary to make appropriate changes in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, since the combination in one body of powers to initiate criminal proceedings (in particular, sending a corresponding resolution to the preliminary investigation body to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution) and the powers to supervise over compliance with the law by the preliminary investigation bodies is impossible in practice; it requires additional research and appropriate changes.


Author(s):  
Alexander Fedyunin

The subject of this research is the issues emerging in consideration of jurisdiction of the material on extradition of a foreign citizen by the Russian Federation. The article touches upon the peculiarities of national and territorial aspect of jurisdiction, and its specific regulation in the criminal procedure law. The article employs the general scientific and private scientific methods, such as scientific analysis, generalization, comparative-legal, formal-logical, which allowed to most fully reflect the essence and problematic aspects of the selected topic. The question at hand is of major importance for the theory of criminal procedure and law enforcement practice, as the mistakes in determination of jurisdiction of the material are a severe violation of the rights, including the convict, and entail the unconditional annulment of court decision. The analysis of the most common mistakes occurred in application of the norms regulating the jurisdiction of extradition of a foreign citizen convicted by the court of the Russian Federation, as well as theoretical issues associated with determination of the court that deals with the particular issue allows outlining the vector and finding solution to the indicated problems.


Issues of Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 89-93
Author(s):  
S.M. Darovskikh ◽  
◽  
Z.V Makarova ◽  

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.


Author(s):  
Oleg Gribunov ◽  
Gennady Nebratenko ◽  
Evgeny Bezruchko ◽  
Elena Millerova

The authors examine the specific features of criminal law assessment of involvement in prostitution and the organization of this activity through the use or the threat of violence. At the beginning, they stress the urgency of counteracting the social phenomenon of prostitution, analyze the very concept of «prostitution», its debatable and problematic aspects, because it is impossible to offer a correct qualification of criminal actions connected with prostitution (crimes under Art. 240 and 241 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) without determining the boundaries of providing sexual services specifically referring to the term «prostitution». It is concluded that the key problem for determining the scope of sexual actions described by the term «prostitution» is the lack of an official definition of this term in Russian legislation as well as a wide variety of services in the modern sex industry. The authors state that the understanding of prostitution as a historical social phenomenon as a situation when a woman provides sexual services to different men by performing sexual acts with them for previously discussed material compensation is outdated and does not reflect the multiple dimensions of modern prostitution. While researching the issues of qualifying criminal acts connected with prostitution and involving the use or the threat of violence within the framework of this article, the authors have analyzed the work of both Russian and foreign scholars and studied examples of investigation and court practice. They examine the problems of legal assessment of criminal law categories «violence» and «the threat of using violence» regarding publically dangerous actions connected with the involvement in prostitution and the organization of this activity. The authors present the criteria of differentiating between corpus delicti where such actions are criminally punishable and other corpus delicti, as well as the cases that require qualification for multiple crimes. The results of this research allowed the authors to work out and present recommendations on qualifying criminal actions connected with prostitution and involving the use of the threat of violence.


Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  

The article deals with the problem of classifying interim decisions among those that are appealed in a shortened timeline, and determining the list of such decisions, as well as the closely related problem of determining the rules for calculating such a shortened timeline. Currently, the Criminal Procedure law provides for the possibility of appealing a number of interim decisions made at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings before the final decision Moreover, for appealing some interim decisions at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings, a general period of appeal is provided - 10 days from the date of the court decision, or the same period from the date of serving with a copy of the decision the person who is in custody, while for others a shortened timeline is 3 days from the date of the decision. Meanwhile, it follows from the literal interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that within a shortened three-day period, court decisions on the election of preventive measures in the form of a ban on certain actions, bail, house arrest, detention, the refusal to apply them or extend their application can be appealed. At the same time, such a conclusion is not confirmed either in the positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation or in judicial practice. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedure law, the position of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation, scientific literature and practice, several problems are highlighted. Thus, the author states the discrepancy between the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation when it comes to establishing the terms for appealing the court decision on a preventive measure in the form of bail. In addition, there is no single criterion for establishing shortened deadlines for appealing interim decisions, and there-fore, the list of such decisions requires analysis. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a norm that determines the rules for calculating daily terms. The author formulates several proposals for amendments. It is proposed to determine the criteria for a shortened appeal timeline as the restriction of the constitutional right to liberty and immunity of a person that requires the immediate judicial review of the lawfulness of such a decision. It is also necessary to correct the phrasing of Article 106 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the procedure for applying a preventive measure in the form of bail, and establish the rule that appeal against such an interim court decision is filed according to the rules of Chapter 45.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code within ten days. The list of court decisions which must be appealed in a shortened timeline must be expanded by a court decision on putting a suspect or an accused into a medical organization providing medical or psychiatric care in hospital settings for forensic examination, as well as the extension of a person’s stay in a medical organization. In addition, the author has analyzed the approaches to the calculation of daily terms and proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation by establishing a single procedure for calculating daily terms, which does not take into account the day that served as a starting point of the term.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Назаренко ◽  
Gennadiy Nazarenko

In the article anti-corruption policy is considered in criminal law and in the preventive aspects. The definition of anti-corruption policy by legal means is given. It is shown that the most significant and effective tool in this direction (kind) of policy is the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, the preventive potential of criminal law is not enough. The law does not cover a lot of corruption manifestations, which are involved in the use of any official status, its authority and opportunities. Up to the present time criminal law is not given with the accordance of the Federal Law «On combating corruption» from 25.12..2008 №273-FZ (as amended on 22.12.2014). Criminal law measures applied to corrupt officials, have palliative nature: they are based on the concept of limited use of criminal law and mitigation of punishment. The author makes a reasonable conclusion that more effective implementation of anti-corruption policy requires the adoption of new criminal law which contains the Chapter on corruption crimes, sanctions of which must include imprisonment as punishment as well as confiscation of property or life deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or to be engaged in certain activities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document