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 ◽  

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.

Author(s):  
Кирилл Иванович ЛАРИН

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.


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.


Author(s):  
Nikolay Letelkin ◽  
Dmitry Neganov

The article examines the situationality of modern lawmaking in the field of criminal law in the context of the adoption of the federal law of 1.04.2020 No. 100-FZ «On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Articles 31 and 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation», adopted by the State The Duma of the Russian Federation in connection with the pandemics of the Corona Virus Disеаsе 2019 (COVID-19).


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 646-649
Author(s):  
Alexander Yurevich Epihin ◽  
Oleg Aleksandrovich Zaitsev ◽  
Ekaterina Pavlovna Grishina ◽  
Andrey Viktorovich Mishin ◽  
Gulnar Isaevna Aliyeva

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 04001
Author(s):  
Olga Vyacheslavovna Yevstigneyeva

Pre-requisites of the research are the establishment of cassation courts of general jurisdiction in Russia, as well as no clear procedure in the Russian Federation Criminal Procedure Code for returning criminal cases to the prosecutor by the cassation court upon the grounds causing the impaired position of the convict (or acquitted person). The research purpose is to formulate requirements based on the principle of justice to the legal institute of returning criminal cases to the prosecutor by the cassation court for circumstances showing the need to impair the position of the convict (or acquitted person). The Methods are abstraction, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, modeling, ascending from abstract to concrete. The article substantiates that the grounds to return a criminal case to the prosecutor provided for in the Russian Federation Criminal Procedure Code causing remission of a sentence under a cassation procedure represent a type of material breaches of criminal procedure law that affect the outcome of the case. When such circumstances cause an impaired position of the convict (or acquitted person), they must comply with the requirements of justice.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-188
Author(s):  
Oksana V. Kachalova ◽  
◽  
Viktor I. Kachalov

Introduction. 2021 marks the 20th anniversary of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, adopted by the State Duma on November 22, 2001 by Federal Law No. 174-FZ. The development of criminal procedure legislation in these years was not always consistent, often characterized by chaotic and hasty measures. Nevertheless, the main factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, as well as the key trends in the legal regulation of criminal procedure legal relations, have remained fairly stable for twenty years. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The object of the study is the norms of criminal procedure law that have emerged and developed during the period of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation since 2001. The methodological basis of the study is the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which allowed us to study the subject of the study in relation to other legal phenomena, as well as general scientific methods of knowledge (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, analogy, and modelling) and private scientific methods of knowledge (formal legal, historical-legal, and comparative-legal). Results. Among the variety of various factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, there are several main ones: 1. The impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal proceedings. Having ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights and Freedoms in 1998, Russia voluntarily assumed obligations in the field of ensuring citizens rights and freedoms, as well as creating the necessary conditions for their implementation. Among the most important criminal procedure norms and institutions that have emerged in the system of criminal procedure regulation under the influence of the positions of the ECHR, the following are notable: a reasonable period of criminal proceedings, the rights of participants in the verification of a crime report, the disclosure of the testimony of an absent witness at a court session, and alternative preventive measures to detention. 2. Optimisation of procedural resources and improvement of the efficiency of criminal proceedings. From the very beginning of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, there was a special procedure for judicial proceedings, which is a simplified form of consideration of criminal cases, provided for in Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In 2009, this procedure was extended to cases with concluded pre-trial cooperation agreements (Chapter 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation), and in 2013, the institute of abbreviated inquiry appeared in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (Chapter 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). 3. Social demand for increasing the independence of the court, and the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings. Society’s needs to improve the independence of judges, increase public confidence in the court, transparency and quality of justice led to the reform of the jury court in 2016 (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 190-FZ). As a result of the reform, the court with the participation of jurors began to function at the level of district courts, the jurisdiction of criminal cases for jurors was expanded, the number of jurors was reduced from 12 to 8 in regional courts and 6 in district courts. However, practice has shown that sentences handed down by a court on the basis of a verdict rendered by a jury are overturned by higher courts much more often than others due to committed violations, which are associated, among other things, with the inability to ensure the objectivity of jurors. In the context of a request for an independent court, Article 81 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on the independence of judges (Federal Law of 2 July 2013 N 166-FZ) was adopted. 4. Reducing the degree of criminal repression. In the context of this trend, institutions have emerged in the criminal and criminal procedure laws that regulate new types of exemption from criminal liability. In 2011, Article 281 “Termination of criminal prosecution in connection with compensation for damage” was adopted, concerning a number of criminal cases on tax and other economic crimes (Federal Law of 7 December 2011 N 420). In 2016, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation introduced rules on the termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine (Federal Law of 3 July 2016 N 323-FZ). 5. Digitalisation of modern society. The rapid development of information technologies and their implementation in all spheres of public life has put on the agenda the question of adapting a rather archaic “paper” criminal process to the needs of today, and the possibilities of using modern information technologies in the process of criminal proceedings. Among the innovations in this area, it should be noted the appearance in the criminal procedure law of Article 1861 “Obtaining information about connections between subscribers and (or) subscriber devices” (Federal Law of 1 July 2010 N 143-FZ), Article 4741 “The procedure for using electronic documents in criminal proceedings” (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 220-FZ), the legal regulation of video-conferencing in criminal proceedings (Federal Law of 20 March 2011 N 39-FZ), and the introduction of audio recording of court sessions (Federal Law of 29 July 2018-FZ N 228-FZ), etс. Currently, the possibilities of further digitalisation of criminal proceedings, and the use of programs based on artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings, ets. are being actively discussed. Discussion and Conclusion. The main factors determining the vector of development of modern criminal justice should, in our opinion, include the impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal justice; optimisation of procedural resources and the need to improve the efficiency of criminal justice, social demands for strengthening the independence of the court, adversarial criminal proceedings; the needs of society to reduce the degree of criminal repression, and digitalisation of modern society.


Author(s):  
R.R. Pashkeeva ◽  
A.I. Shmarev

In the article, the authors consider the points of view of scientists regarding additions to the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation that grant powers to district courts to consider criminal cases with the participation of jurors. Using concrete practical examples, the author analyzes the reasons for the acquittal of jurors in the district courts of the Udmurt Republic. Having come to reasonable conclusions, the authors suggest that public prosecutors take additional organizational and methodological measures when preparing for the consideration of criminal cases by a court with the participation of jurors. Some of the proposals have been tested in practice and have allowed prosecutors to prepare more carefully for court sessions than to avoid professional and tactical mistakes that lead to acquittal verdicts. Taking these measures into account, in the new criminal cases, the jury returned a guilty verdict, which formed the basis of the guilty verdict, in particular, despite the appeal supported by a higher court.


Author(s):  
Виктор Шаров ◽  
Viktor Sharov

In the article the analysis of article 186 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation “Monitoring and recording of conversations” and operational search event “Listening to telephone conversations” are their common features. It is concluded that there are no significant differences between them and there is a transfer of operational search event in the criminal process as an investigative action, as the logic of construction, so the subject of its implementation (operational units) and the method of (behind the scenes). Three options three options for the development of procedural legislation, wider use of operational and search activities of proof in criminal cases.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
Ju. V. Kuvaldina

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document