scholarly journals SPECIAL PROCEDURE OF TRIAL IN CASE OF CONSENT OF THE ACCUSED WITH THE CHARGE BROUGHT: THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE LAW

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
Ju. V. Kuvaldina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Special Order

The article makes assumptions about the possible consequences of changes made by the Federal Law as of July 20, 2020, No. 224-FZ in edition of the Part 1 of Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. According to this amendment, criminal cases on grave crimes will now be considered in the general order, unless a pre-trial cooperation agreement is concluded with the accused. The relevance of this novel is due to the fact that the legislator has once again revised the approach to defining the criteria for simplifying the criminal procedural form. In this regard, practice in the near future may face new or, more precisely, well forgotten old problems related to the period of the beginning of the judicial reform in 1991. A number of issues related to ensuring the right of the accused to a special order of trial will require scientific understanding. The author analyzes foreign legislation, previously and current domestic criminal procedure legislation, opinions on this issue of representatives of the highest levels of the judicial system, prosecutor's office and the legal profession, scientists, statistical data and reviews of the activities of courts of general jurisdiction in criminal cases in 2019. The author comes to the conclusion that in Russia the possibility of applying a simplified procedure associated with the reduction or refusal of the judicial investigation was not directly dependent on the severity of the crime committed, and the reform of the special procedure for judicial proceedings undertaken by the legislator is untimely and is not provided with either personnel or material technical or financial resources. According to the author, the decrease in the number of sentences passed in a special order will occur due to the infringement of the right of those accused of serious crimes to be tried in the procedure provided for in Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In this regard, the article outlines the directions for the further development of a special procedure for judicial proceedings, strengthening its consensual nature and ensuring the guarantees of the rights of the accused and victims in this procedure.

scholarly journals FEATURES OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF PRIVATE PROSECUTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 875-880
Author(s):  
E.F. Tensina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedural Rights

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.

scholarly journals Prospects of Improving the Mechanism of Judicial Protection in Russian Criminal Proceedings: Issues of Theory and Practic

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 387-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iraida Smolkova ◽  
Tatyana Vilkova ◽  
Roman Maziuk ◽  
Sergey Nasonov ◽  
Alexander Nichiporenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

Evaluation of the trends of judicial protections development in accordance with constitutional and international legal standards is carried out through the prism of analyzing draft laws regulating court procedures and the reform of Russian court system. The author argue that it is not acceptable to limit the right to judicial appeal against the actions (inaction) and decisions of the preliminary investigation bodies and the prosecutor by introducing the obligatory preliminary examination of such complaints by the head of the investigation agency or the prosecutor according to the procedure set by Art. 124 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. They also criticize the draft law according to which only the introduction and the resolution of the verdict are pronounced on all the criminal cases: if made into law, this will greatly limit the transparency of criminal court procedures and the right of the accused and their defense attorney to appeal the verdict. The authors identify the faults in the draft law aimed at simplifying the procedure of examining the appeals (petitions) against interim solutions because the elimination of the court investigation will limit the implementation of the adversarial principle at the stage the court of appeals proceedings. It is shown that the current reform of procedures of a jury trial is aimed at strengthening and improving the judicial protection mechanism. The authors summarize the conclusions of contemporary research that although some parameters of the jurys efficiency could vary depending of the number of the jurors, in general, a smaller or a greater number of jurors does not have a decisive impact on the quality of the verdict. They show the positive prospects of giving the Head of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation the right to initiate the supervisory proceedings for criminal cases and of including in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation the right of the RF Commissioner for Human Rights to submit cassation and supervision petitions. The analysis of draft laws allows the authors to evaluate the trends for improving the mechanism of court protection in the criminal court procedures of the Russian Federation in each of the two «dimensions» of judicial protection - the institutional and the functional one.

scholarly journals Law, Legislator, Practice: Some Judgments on the Effectiveness of Certain Truncated Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 110-123
Author(s):  
M. A. Baranova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Fiction ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the compromise model of building criminal proceedings in Russia on the example of special proceedings provided for in Chapters 40 and 40.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The dynamics of their application, emerging practical difficulties and incidents are monitored. The prospect of further use of special proceedings in criminal cases of serious and especially serious crimes is considered. Based on the analysis of specific criminal cases, it is proved that a significant reduction in the amount of punishment “guaranteed” by these proceedings is a legal fiction. Multiple negative features of their implementation are considered. The author substantiates the opinion that a special procedure for considering criminal cases for all serious and especially serious crimes, regardless of the forms of post-criminal behavior of the accused, is inadmissible.

USING RESULTS OF STING OPERATION IN CRIMINAL CASES PROVING

2021 ◽  
pp. 132-136
Author(s):  
Кирилл Иванович ЛАРИН
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Sting Operation

В статье рассматриваются проблемные вопросы, связанные с использованием в качестве доказательств результатов оперативного эксперимента. Предлагается отказаться от проведения оперативного эксперимента по инициативе оперативных подразделений и допустить его проведение исключительно в рамках рассмотрения сообщения о преступлении, на основании поручения следователя Следственного комитета в порядке статьи 144 УПК РФ. The article deals with problematic issues associated with the use of the results of an operational experiment as evidence. It is proposed to refuse to conduct an operational experiment on the initiative of operational units and allow it to be conducted exclusively within the framework of considering a report on a crime, on the basis of an order from an investigator of the Investigative Committee in accordance with Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

Prosecutor in the Court of Cassation in Criminal Cases

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Лев Бертовский ◽  
Lyev Byertovskiy ◽  
Дина Гехова ◽  
Dina Gekhova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Moscow City ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

Federal Law No. 433-FZ «On Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Annulment of Certain Legislative Acts (Provisions of Legislative Acts) of the Russian Federation» entered into force since January 1, 2013 in relation to the powers of prosecutors to lodge cassation representations against court’s decisions is under review in the article. The authors analyse judicial practice of cassation instance in Moscow City Court of 2014 year on criminal cases and demonstrate some omissions of prosecutors in consideration of cases in the court of cassation. The conclusion shows that a cassation representation should be prepared and submitted by subordinate to higher prosecutor, provided that public prosecutor shall obtain the right to apply directly to that prosecutor who has the right to lodge a cassation representation along with the project thereof. Such novel will positively influence to the quality of cassation representations prepared and made by prosecutors.

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 On Criminal Procedure and Criminalistic Measures of Counteracting Crimes Against Legal Entities

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-105
Author(s):  
Olga Aivazova ◽  
Galina Vardanyan ◽  
Irina Smirnova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Entities

The article discusses some aspects of proving in cases of crimes against legal entities. The criminalistic description of the victim represented by a legal entity determines specific details of applying criminalistic and criminal procedure measures aimed at the identification, investigation, detection and prevention of such crimes. Under the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, one of the elements of ordering criminal proceedings is the protection of rights and legal interests of organizations that became victims of crimes. Part 1 of Art. 42 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation details this guideline for the first time by giving legal entities, viewed as independent subjects of criminal procedure legal relations, the right to be recognized as victims of criminal actions if the crime inflicted damage on their property or business reputation. Nevertheless, the imperfections in the regulation of legal entities’ participation in criminal proceeding, and the insufficient attention to the specifics of realizing their rights and legal interests in comparison with the physical persons of a similar procedural status give rise to numerous problems. The complex of such problems has a negative impact on the effectiveness of investigating this category of crimes and, as a consequence, on the ability of criminal proceedings to produce the intended result. The literal interpretation of Part 1, Art. 42 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation points out that the consequences of such crimes must include the infliction of two types of damage simultaneously — «to property and to business reputation», which can hardly be considered a good de­finition from the standpoint of juridical technique. Quite naturally, the investigation and court practice shows that law enforcers, while collecting proof on the character and size of damage inflicted on legal entities as a result of a crime, usually limit themselves to proving material damage, and even this damage is not proven in full (the common omission being losses of expected income). As for the damage inflicted on business reputation of a legal entity, its establishment during criminal proceedings is still problematic and, in practice, there is usually a gap in proving it. The authors point out that incomplete character of evidentiary information regarding the infliction of damage on the business reputation of legal entities is inadmissible and present their recommendations for resolving this problem, including the use of specialist knowledge and the improvements in the tactics of specific investigatory actions aimed at obtaining criminalistically relevant information on the case.

scholarly journals Real Served Term in Case of Parole: Problems of Determination

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Руслан Долотов ◽  
Ruslan Dolotov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the practice of parole. The main goal of the study is to determine if is it properly to include a period of house arrest in six months term of imprisonment, necessary for the creation of the right to parole. The article proves that in practice they judge from the following conclusion: as the period of house arrest is included in the period of detention, and the detention period is included in the term of imprisonment, so when a real served term for parole is determined it is necessary to include in it the period of house arrest. The author explains that such conclusion is flawed since it is based on a dogmatic rather than systemic interpretation of the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation without understanding the role which plays set by the legislator six months term in case of parole in the system of criminal law measures.

scholarly journals Restriction of the access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
pp. 58-69
Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

This article analyzes the problems of implementation of the right of access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The author carefully examines the legislation of the countries of post-Soviet space on filing a complaint against actions (omissions), as well as decisions of the prosecuting agency in pretrial proceedings. The subject of this research is the norms of the Russian and foreign legislation that regulate the right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the right of access to justice. The article employs the universal systemic method of cognition; comparative-legal, formal-legal, and statistical methods; as well as logical analysis of the normative legal acts. It is indicated that restriction of the access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is also established by the practice developed in law enforcement for evaluation of the complaint prior to its consideration involving  the parties with the possibility of making a decision on whether to remit or reject the complaint in the absence of legislatively specified grounds, which directly affects the number of addressed complaints. The conclusion is made on the need to specify the grounds for remitting the complaint of an applicant filed in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, for the purpose of excluding the possibility of decision made by the court that is not based on the law on remitting or rejecting the complaint for consideration (the Article 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document