scholarly journals Ensuring The Right of The Suspect And The Accused For Defense

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (SPE3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Valerevich Popenkov ◽  
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov ◽  
Sergey Nikolaevich Khoryakov ◽  
Lyudmila Nikolaevna Poselskaya

Authors study the issues of providing the suspect and the accused with the right for defense in criminal proceedings through the prism of the provisions enshrined in international normative legal acts and the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The relevance of this article is substantiated by the authors by the fact that the consideration of the problems of the procedural status of the suspect and the accused in the criminal case should start with this basic provision of the principle of criminal proceedings, such as ensuring the right for protection to the suspect and the accused under article 16 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In the context of the modern legal state and the requirements of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which establishes the basic rights and freedoms of the person and the citizen. The solution to this problem becomes extremely important in the field of criminal justice, which is inevitably associated with the restriction of the constitutional rights of the individual within the limits allowed by law. In this regard, the problems of ensuring the right of the suspect and the accused to a defense require special attention. Based on the results obtained, the authors conclude that compliance with the guarantees of the right to defense of suspects and accused persons has a significant impact on the domestic and foreign policy image of the Russian Federation, being directly proportional to the legal insinuations of international organizations and attempts to influence the Russian legal system.

Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya

The purpose of this study was an attempt to theoretically understand the subject of judicial consideration of complaints against decisions, actions (inaction) of officials carrying out criminal prosecution. The research was carried out on the basis of comparative legal, formal logical, empirical, statistical methods. Judicial statistics for the year 2020 have been provided, and legislation has been studied from a historical and contemporary perspective, taking into account the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The problem is that, in practice, for about 20 years the courts have had difficulties in determining the subject of complaints, since neither in theory nor in practice a consensus has been developed on this issue. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation also does not contain a definition of the concept of «subject matter». The situation is aggravated by the presence of evaluative concepts in the text of the law, leading to a varied understanding of the subject of appeal by the courts, which leads to a violation of the constitutional rights of citizens at the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings. In the article, taking into account the analysis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, legislation and the opinion of scientists, a recommendation was made to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to specify the subject of consideration of complaints in accordance with Art. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in order to eliminate existing contradictions in practice and increase the level of protection of individual rights in pre-trial proceedings.


Author(s):  
Olga Aivazova ◽  
Galina Vardanyan ◽  
Irina Smirnova

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.


Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina

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).


Author(s):  
Olga Andreeva ◽  
Oleg Zaycev ◽  
Anna Kudryavceva

The recent emergence of such new previously unknown threats to the state, the society and the individual that are not provided for in the key documents on strategic development of the Russian Federation as the pandemic of COVID-19 will lead to long-term unpredictable consequences and make a considerable impact on all spheres of activity. In the future, other previously unknown and equally dangerous infectious diseases may emerge and crisis situations may develop. The goal of this study is to identify the problem areas of criminal proceedings in crisis situations and to develop research-based and practically relevant recommendations aimed at ensuring the constitutional rights and freedoms of criminal proceedings participants in an emergency situation, a lockdown introduced to protect the life and health of these participants as well as people they contact with, regardless of their procedural legal status. Specific tasks of the study: 1) to identify the special features of Russian legislation that regulate the procedure of the preliminary investigation and the court inquiry of a criminal case that permit distance participation of any criminal case participants; 2) to analyze the results of the work of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation that took into account the threats that the pandemic poses to the state, the individual and the society; 3) to present the views of Russian and foreign researchers of court proceedings on the analyzed sphere of activities; 4) to study the international experience connected with the impact of infectious diseases on criminal justice; 5) to present recommendations regarding the future development of legislation and improvement of the practice of law enforcement aimed at ensuring the constitutional rights and freedoms of the participants of criminal proceedings in the conditions of emergency. The methodological basis of research is the dialectical method of cognition, the general research methods of abstracting, analysis and synthesis, as well as specific legal methods: comparative-legal, logical-legal, etc. The authors have come to the conclusion that COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable influence on the introduction of new information and communication technologies into the criminal court proceedings. The existing situation convincingly demonstrates that it is necessary to search for new conceptual ideas and technologies, to use them in the doctrine of criminal procedure law and to develop research-based suggestions on improving legislation and the practice of law enforcement, which will effectively ensure the constitutional rights and freedoms of the subjects of criminal procedure relations in the conditions of isolation, including a right to a fair trial and access to justice. The authors argue for the expediency of modernizing legislation, for the transition of court proceedings from a simple written form to the electronic one, as well as to the paper-free interaction of all criminal proceedings participants.


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):  
A.V. Grishin ◽  
M.N. Tarsheva

The article deals with some areas of improvement of domestic criminal procedure legislation in terms of expanding dispositive principles and introducing alternative (non-punitive) forms of response to a crime in the current Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation. The problems generated by the punitive approach to responding to the facts of committed socially dangerous acts are touched upon, and the values and ideas of a different (restorative) approach are highlighted, which, according to the authors, should not replace, but complement and enrich criminal proceedings. In addition, global and domestic trends in the development of legislation in the field of criminal justice are outlined. The authors propose the concept of restorative justice and exemption from criminal prosecution of persons who voluntarily compensated for the harm caused by the crime, with the full consent of the injured party. The authors highlight the essence of reconciliation mechanisms. The code of criminal procedure of the Russian Federation proposes some changes related to the introduction of the concept of conciliatory justice and the expansion of dispositive principles. The authors conclude that a reasonable compromise in the field of criminal justice is not only justified, but even necessary. The social value of conciliation procedures is that consensus is reached through mutual concessions (taking into account the interests and requests of both sides of the conflict) and is aimed at resolving the criminal conflict. Through reconciliation, the restoration of the disturbed order of functioning of public relations is achieved, as well as the restoration of social justice, which is directly related to the satisfaction of the interests of the injured party and depends on whether the victim remains satisfied with the outcome of the case.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 362-367
Author(s):  
N.V. Mashinskaya ◽  

The problem of legislative regulation of the procedure for reconciliation of the victim with the suspected, the accused until a certain time was only a subject of discussion in the scientific literature. At the same time the state’s need to find measures that can eliminate the consequences of crimes without the use of ordinary criminal procedures has actualized the work on introducing alternative methods of settling the criminal-legal conflict into criminal proceedings. Given the urgent need to apply this procedure in practice, the Interregional Public Center “Judicial and Legal Reform” has developed and posted on its website a draft federal law “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation to Provide the Victim, Suspect, and Accused with the Possibility of Reconciliation.” To implement the procedure for reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the drafters of the bill propose to include a new chapter in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). The author of the article critically evaluates the attempt due to the inconsistency of a number of novels, their uncertainty and inconsistency with the norms of the criminal procedure law. To eliminate the existing shortcomings, it is proposed to provide a separate article defining the procedural status of the conciliator and to include the specified rule in Ch. 8 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. As a guarantee of the right of the victim, suspect, accused to reconciliation, the introduction of an appropriate addition to the criminal procedure norms governing the legal status of the named participants in criminal proceedings is considered.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (10(79)) ◽  
pp. 12-18
Author(s):  
G. Bubyreva

The existing legislation determines the education as "an integral and focused process of teaching and upbringing, which represents a socially important value and shall be implemented so as to meet the interests of the individual, the family, the society and the state". However, even in this part, the meaning of the notion ‘socially significant benefit is not specified and allows for a wide range of interpretation [2]. Yet the more inconcrete is the answer to the question – "who and how should determine the interests of the individual, the family and even the state?" The national doctrine of education in the Russian Federation, which determined the goals of teaching and upbringing, the ways to attain them by means of the state policy regulating the field of education, the target achievements of the development of the educational system for the period up to 2025, approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 4, 2000 #751, was abrogated by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 29, 2014 #245 [7]. The new doctrine has not been developed so far. The RAE Academician A.B. Khutorsky believes that the absence of the national doctrine of education presents a threat to national security and a violation of the right of citizens to quality education. Accordingly, the teacher has to solve the problem of achieving the harmony of interests of the individual, the family, the society and the government on their own, which, however, judging by the officially published results, is the task that exceeds the abilities of the participants of the educational process.  The particular concern about the results of the patriotic upbringing served as a basis for the legislative initiative of the RF President V. V. Putin, who introduced the project of an amendment to the Law of RF "About Education of the Russian Federation" to the State Duma in 2020, regarding the quality of patriotic upbringing [3]. Patriotism, considered by the President of RF V. V. Putin as the only possible idea to unite the nation is "THE FEELING OF LOVE OF THE MOTHERLAND" and the readiness for every sacrifice and heroic deed for the sake of the interests of your Motherland. However, the practicing educators experience shortfalls in efficient methodologies of patriotic upbringing, which should let them bring up citizens, loving their Motherland more than themselves. The article is dedicated to solution to this problem based on the Value-sense paradigm of upbringing educational dynasty of the Kurbatovs [15].


Author(s):  
Яна Валерьевна Самиулина

В настоящей статье предпринята попытка исследовать отдельные проблемные аспекты института потерпевшего в российском уголовном процессе. В этих целях подвергнуты анализу правовые нормы, регламентирующие его процессуальный статус. Раскрываются отдельные пробелы уголовно-процессуального законодательства в сфере защиты законных прав и интересов потерпевшего. Автор акцентирует внимание на том, что совершенствование уголовно-процессуального законодательства в части расширения правомочий потерпевшего по отстаиванию своих нарушенных преступлением прав следует продолжить. На основании проведенного исследования действующего законодательства в части регламентации прав потерпевшего от преступления предлагается расширить перечень получаемых им копий постановлений, указанных в п. 13 ч. 2 ст. 42 УПК РФ. Автор предлагает включить в перечень указанной законодательной нормы право получения потерпевшим копии постановления об избрании конкретного вида меры пресечения, избранного в отношении подозреваемого (обвиняемого). Для создания действенного механизма защиты интересов потерпевших от преступления юридических лиц предлагаем ч. 9 ст. 42 УПК РФ изложить в следующей редакции: «в случае признания потерпевшим юридического лица его процессуальное право в уголовном процессе осуществляет представляющий его профессиональный адвокат». This article attempts to investigate certain problematic aspects of the institution of the victim in the Russian criminal process. For this purpose, analyzed the individual norms governing his procedural status. Separate gaps of the criminal procedure legislation in the sphere of protection of the legal rights and interests of the victim are disclosed. The author emphasizes that the improvement of the criminal procedure legislation in terms of the extension of the victim’s authority to defend his rights violated by the crime should be continued. On the basis of the study of the current legislation regarding the regulation of the rights of the victim of a crime, it is proposed to expand the list of decisions received by him, referred to in paragraph 13, part 2 of article 42 Code of Criminal Procedure. The author proposes to include in the list of the indicated legislative norm the right to receive the victim a copy of the decision on the selection of a specific type of preventive measure, selected in relation to the suspect (accused). To create an effective mechanism for protecting the interests of legal entities victims of a crime, we offer part 9 of art. 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation shall be reworded as follows: «if a legal entity is recognized as a victim, his procedural right in criminal proceedings is exercised by the professional lawyer representing him».


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document