Presumption of Innocence as a Principle of Administrative Offense Proceedings

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 30-34
Author(s):  
Artem R. Nobel ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation

The presumption of innocence is defined as one of the key principles of proceedings on the cases of administrative offenses. Using the current legislation, the legal positions of the highest courts of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights, judicial practice, the author reveals the essence of the presumption of innocence by highlighting the elements of this principle and characterizing their content.

7 International Treaties in Russian Judicial and Arbitral Practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Butler William E
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation

This chapter explores the role of Soviet and post-Soviet Russian courts in interpreting and applying international treaties. It is clear that Soviet courts dealt more frequently with treaties than the scanty published judicial practice of that period suggests. This early body of treaties may also have contributed to the emergence in the early 1960s of priority being accorded to Soviet treaties insofar as they contained rules providing otherwise than Soviet legislation. Whatever the volume of cases involving treaties that were considered by Soviet courts prior to 1991, the inclusion of Article 15(4) in the 1993 Russian Constitution transformed the situation. A further transformation occurred when the Russian Federation acceded to the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and began to participate in the deliberations of the European Court for Human Rights in Strasbourg.

scholarly journals Reforming the National System of Law as a Response to Pilot Rulings

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 116-119
Author(s):  
O.A. Golikova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
European Convention ◽  
National System ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Executive System

The article deals with the problem of implementation by the Russian Federation of the provisions of the European Convention on human rights of 1950. the article Deals with systematic violations of article 3 of the Convention in the framework of the criminal Executive system. The article analyzes the judicial practice of the European court of human rights in the light of violations of this article. The practice of making pilot judgments by the Court is noted as a measure of improving the mechanism of legal protection, namely, improving the conditions of transportation of persons deprived of liberty.

scholarly journals The Material and Procedural Aspects of Non Bis In Idem Principle in Proceedings on Administrative Offenses

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 39-42
Author(s):  
Artem R. Nobel ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The essence of the principle of one-time administrative responsibility is considered, its concept and proposals for improving the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation are formulated. The conclusions are based on the provisions of the legislation on administrative offenses, the legal positions of the highest courts of the Russian Federation, the European Court of Human Rights, a comparative analysis of the current criminal and criminal procedure legislation. The operation of the principle non bis in idem in proceedings on the cases of administrative offenses is revealed by highlighting the material and procedural elements that make up its content.

Dissemination of damaging information (defamation) as a type of civil tort: concept definition

2020 ◽  
pp. 378-382
Author(s):  
Valeriya Smorchkova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

We consider such category as defamation, which is widespread in many foreign countries. Defamation is the dissemination of damaging information, which, however, is true. This concept has become widespread in the last century, many states have adopted special legislation that mediates relations in this area. For example, the United Kingdom has the “Defamation Act 1996” and Singapore has the “Defamation Ordinance 1960”. We emphasize that in the same 1960s in our country “the system of defamation seemed absolutely unacceptable and contrary to the spirit of society”. In the course of study, comparative legal methods are used to analyze the legislation of states with the Anglo-Saxon and Romano-Germanic legal system. Based on the study of the doctrinal points of view of scientists and the positions of higher courts, the definition of this category is formed from the position of civil tort. The following definition is proposed: “Defamation is a violation of civil legislation, which consists in the dissemination of false information damaging the honor, dignity and business reputation of a person and also the dissemination of truthful personal information, the disclosure of which violates the conservation law are listed in the intangible benefits of the citizens”. We analyze the provisions of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of February 24, 2005 no. 3 “On judicial practice in cases of protecting the honor and dignity of citizens, as well as the business reputation of citizens and legal entities”. We conclude that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation borrowed advanced provisions from the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.

Liability for Administrative Offences: Standards of European Court of Human Rights and the Current State of the Legislation on Administrative Offences in Russia

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 307
Author(s):  
Olga E. SHISHKINA ◽  
Olga V. HABIBULINA ◽  
Aleksandr F. REKHOVSKIY
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Reforms ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Current State ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedural Safeguards ◽  
The One

Recently, there has been a substantial increase in the number of judgments delivered by the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the Russian Federation on the complaints filed by Russian citizens, including the complaints related to the liability for administrative offences. The characteristic tendency of the European Court of Human Rights to qualify administrative offences as criminal acts not only brings into focus the issue of ensuring procedural safeguards for individuals charged with administrative offences but also touches upon material aspects of the relation between criminal and administrative law-breaking in Russia as well as changes the traditional juristic view upon the essence of the legislation on administrative offence. Political and economic reforms of Perestroika and the first post-Soviet decade had a significant influence on the institution of administrative justice. Hence, on the one hand, its current state is caused by objective reasons. On the other hand, the legislator, having quite a broad discretion in determining whether to impose administrative or criminal sanctions in each particular case, has seriously blurred the material boundary between criminal and administrative offences. The problem of present-day legislation on administrative offences in Russia is a material hypertrophy of administrative liability together with continuous reduction of procedural safeguards and guarantees for individuals charged with administrative offences. The procedural norms of the existing Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation cannot provide for the adversarial nature of the administrative trial due to the fact that the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation is not methodologically aimed at regulating administrative (judicial) proceedings.

RESTRICTIONS ON RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF A MAN AND A CITIZEN IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AS A MEANS OF DEFENSE OF CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Болотин ◽  
Vladimir Bolotin ◽  
Паньков ◽  
Sergey Pankov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Legal Instrument ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional System

In the article the need of reasonable restriction of human rights and freedoms in modern conditions of increase of various threats for the constitutional system of Russia is shown; the results of modern research in this area, as well as the position of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of Russia, Supreme Court of the Russian Federation are revealed. Defined The system of restrictions, acting legal instrument for the protection of the constitutional order, the conditions and criteria for the limitation of rights and freedoms .

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document