scholarly journals ANTI-CORRUPTION THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LEGISLATION OF RUSSIA

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 646-649
Author(s):  
Alexander Yurevich Epihin ◽  
Oleg Aleksandrovich Zaitsev ◽  
Ekaterina Pavlovna Grishina ◽  
Andrey Viktorovich Mishin ◽  
Gulnar Isaevna Aliyeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Teachers And Students ◽  
The Russian Federation

Purpose: In article current trends of application of the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation in compliance with the purpose of criminal legal proceedings and in the context of counteraction corruption and prevention of abuse of the law of the officials who are carrying out criminal prosecution and judicial review and permission of criminal cases are stated. Methodology: In the course of the research of problematic issues and statements of the material of the article the dialectic, comparative and legal, law modeling, logical, inductive and deductive methods were used. Result: As shows investigative and judicial practicians there are enough the facts of unreasonable initiation of legal proceedings concerning businessmen, with an application of measures of criminal procedure coercion (arrest on the property, blocking of bank accounts and so forth) which result is crash of firm. Change of territorial jurisdiction of consideration of the case of another region by the court is directed to the elimination of a possibility of rendering an impact on objectivity of adjudication. Casual distribution of participation of the lawyer in a criminal case to a destination (when he has to be present surely for protection of the defendant) promotes impartiality of realization of the function of protection in pre-judicial production. The intention of the legislator to enter the obligatory video protocol of court session is directed to a performance by all participants of the process of legal instructions and duties will eliminate possible manifestations of corruption character by officials. Applications: This research can be used for universities, teachers, and students. Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of Anti-Corruption The Criminal Procedure Legislation of Russia is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.

scholarly journals Initiation of Criminal Proceedings against a Particular Person as the Ground for Recognizing him as a Suspect (para 1, part 1, art. 46 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation)

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 71-78
Author(s):  
I. V. Smolkova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper is devoted to the analysis of a new ground for recognition of a person as a suspect, introduced under the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, namely, the initiation of a criminal case against the person. The ground under consideration has caused controversial debates among criminal process scholars. The author has carried out a retrospective analysis of the legislative regulation of this ground for giving a person the status of the suspect. The paper evaluates various doctrinal approaches to its merits and disadvantages. The author also demonstartes the need for the new ground for recognition of a person as the suspect in law enforcement on the basis of statistical data, according to which more than half of criminal cases in Russia are initiated against a particular person. The study at question reveals an interconnection between initiation of proceedings upon commission of a crime and a particular person. The conclusion is substantiated that the recognition of a person as a suspect in case of initiation of criminal proceedings against him is aimed at ensuring his right to protection from criminal prosecution. However, the issuance of the order to initiate criminal proceedings against a particular person entails the possibility of implementation of coercive criminal procedural measures against him. It is shown that suspicion forms the substantive basis of recognition of a person as the suspect. The author criticises the approach according to which the issuance of the order to initiate criminal proceedings against a particular person forms an allegation that he has committed an act prohibited under the criminal law. Under this approach the assumption is made that can later be either proven or refuted in the course of further investigation. The author criticises the practice of dividing criminal cases into a judicial perspective and lacking such a perspective, which entails violations of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals suspected in committing crimes.

scholarly journals Relevant Issues of the Improvement of Judicial Consideration of Cases Involving Minors as a Guarantee of Further Just and Humane Support of the Protection of Human and Civil Rights and Freedoms

Russian judge ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 17-20
Author(s):  
Rashit S. Khismatullin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Family Education ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Research Article ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

In a research article, the author examines topical problems of improving the judicial review of cases against minors as a guarantee of further fair and humane protection of human and civil rights and freedoms. As you know, in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation ‘Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. Recognition, observance and protection of human and civil rights and freedoms is the duty of the state’. The Constitution of the Russian Federation established, proclaimed and emphasized — ‘Children are the most important priority of the state policy of Russia. The state creates conditions conducive to the all-round spiritual, moral, intellectual and physical development of children, fostering patriotism, citizenship and respect for elders in them. The state ensures the priority of family education’. Clear, full and unswerving observance by the court of the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as the implementation by the court of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia, which regulate the trial in criminal cases on charges of committing crimes by minors, determine the further fair and humane provision of the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, especially — minors, legal, reasonable, fair and moral judicial consideration of criminal cases against minors. Proposals are being made on amendments and additions to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to modernize the judicial review of criminal cases against minors.

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.

scholarly journals REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON CONNECTIONS BETWEEN SUBSCRIBERS AND (OR) SUBSCRIBER DEVICES

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 801-805
Author(s):  
E.A. Bagavieva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Telecommunication Systems ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Almost All

The investigative action is a request for information about the connections between subscribers and / or subscriber devices, provided for by Article 186.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, it is in demand in connection with the development of telecommunication systems and has been successfully applied in almost all categories of criminal cases. The author has analyzed the requirements for such a criminal procedure decision as the decision of the investigator (interrogator) to initiate before the court a motion to obtain information about connections between subscribers and (or) subscriber devices. Errors made by investigators (interrogators) in the preparation of this decision are indicated. The article discusses the procedure for obtaining a permission to conduct this investigative action, reveals the shortcomings of the legal regulation of obtaining information about connections between subscribers and (or) subscriber devices.

scholarly journals The use of digital communication technologies in the context of a pandemic as a way to improve the effectiveness of justice

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
E. V. Smakhtin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

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.

Forced to sexual activities: legal positions of Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and Republic of Kazakhstan

2019 ◽  
pp. 175-189
Author(s):  
Ardak Alimkhanovna Biyebayeva ◽  
Aigul Mailybayevna Kalguzhinova ◽  
Vera Anatolievna Chunyaeva
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
General Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Sexual Activities ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The relevance of the study is due to the importance of finding effective and at the same time humane measures to combat crime against minors that meet the generally accepted principles and norms of international law. The purpose of the study is to consider the international legal norms that form the basis of standards in the field of implementation of the rights of minors involved in the criminal proceedings orbit. We consider some aspects of the fair juvenile justice standards implementation in the Russian criminal procedure legislation. We analyze the provisions of the key normative acts in the field of juvenile justice, their application practice, as well as doctrinal approaches to the prospect of further improvement of the criminal procedural form of legal proceedings against minors. On the basis of the analysis, we highlight the proceedings features in the criminal cases category: criminal prosecution can be initiated only after reaching a certain age; expanded the subject of proof; the production involves additional participants; the establishment of additional grounds and conditions for the use of coercive measures related to the restriction of freedom; confidentiality, which determines the characteristics of the trial; expansion of the range of issues resolved by the court in sentencing. It has been concluded that the existing domestic criminal proceedings the order of proceedings in criminal cases in juvenile, despite the peculiarities that distinguish it from the general procedure, it is impossible to recognize the self-differentiated procedure.

scholarly journals RATIO OF THE LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL STATUS OF THE HEAD OF INVESTIGATIVE BODY

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-165
Author(s):  
T. Yu. Popova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Sense

Article is devoted to search of author's determination of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body. Determination of the status is given in it is general legal sense, types of legal statuses, such as the general (constitutional), special (patrimonial), individual, the status of the foreigner and branch legal statuses are allocated. The discussion about a ratio of legal status and a legal status on the basis of which conclusions the author has divided concepts of legal and procedural status per se is given. Are carried to number of elements of legal status of the head of investigative body: the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and specified departmental standard legal by acts of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, SK of Russia and FSB of Russia; the criminal liability regulated by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the disciplinary responsibility provided by subordinate regulations for non-execution or inadequate execution of the procedural powers; procedural and administrative accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body. Elements of the criminal procedure status of the designated participant of criminal trial, according to the author, are the rights and duties provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; the accountability of activity of the head of investigative body to the head of higher investigative body regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The author has also mentioned a discussion about existence of criminal procedure responsibility of participants of criminal legal proceedings. In article the maintenance of each of elements of the status and justification of reference of each of them to this or that type of the status is opened. Proceeding from the considered structure, the concept of the criminal procedure status of the head of investigative body as the position of the head of the investigative body including his procedural laws, duties and accountability to the head of higher investigative body regulated only by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation is formulated.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document