scholarly journals The system of pre-trial proceedings in the criminal proceedings of the Russian Federation: Factors of formation

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-642
Author(s):  
Sergey B. Rossinskiy ◽  

The article is devoted to the analysis of historical prerequisites that predetermined the distinctive nature of the national system of Russian pre-trial proceedings as the initial stage of criminal procedure. By analyzing the peculiarities of domestic criminal procedure legislation, and the development of judicial and law enforcement agencies, in addition to drawing comparative parallels with foreign mechanisms for solving and investigating crimes, the author assumes that the gradual autonomy of the Soviet and then Russian system of pre-trial proceedings was a direct result of the well-known historical cataclysms associated with the Soviet power establishment in 1917 and its fall in 1991. It is noted that a rather unique model, based on the chaotic mixing and interweaving of various, including poorly compatible, elements inherent in various models of criminal procedure (French, German, Anglo-Saxon) of pre-trial proceedings has been formed in Russia at present. These elements are linked by means of specific domestic criminal procedure doctrine’s “inventions”, which are reflected in the relevant provisions of criminal procedure law and practical recommendations for law enforcement practice. The modern Russian model of pre-trial proceedings is expressed in the integration of the functions of the “police” and “justice”, in providing law enforcement agencies criminal procedural powers of a forensic nature to collect full-fledged evidence for the upcoming court hearing. According to the author, this explains many doctrinal and legislative problems of Russian pre-trial proceedings, which for many years have had a negative impact on judicial and investigative practice (problems related to the initiation of criminal proceedings; problems of practice in proving the results of operational-search activities; problems related to the legal regulation of the detention of a suspect, etc.). The research concludes that the legislator should stop the law-creating “throwing”, the policy of a chaotic mixing of various elements inherent in different types of criminal proceedings, and, finally, choose one single model that is the most suitable for modern Russia with its laws and realities of development.

Author(s):  
Dmуtrо Pylypenko ◽  

The article analyzes the features of the beginning of criminal proceedings defined by the current criminal procedure law of Ukraine. The criminal procedural norms which define an initial stage in criminal proceedings are investigated. The provisions of the norms of the legislation which determine the legal fact of the beginning of proceedings in the case are analyzed. The positions of scientists in this regard are considered. In particular, the scientific concepts concerning the implementation in the norms of the current law of the provision that existed in the content of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1960, namely the decision to initiate a criminal case. The analysis of the practice of application of the current norms of the criminal procedural law in this regard for the author's point of view on the expediency of such a step is analyzed. The author's position on the preservation of the existing law within the existing provisions, on the commencement of criminal proceedings from the moment of entering information into the unified register of pre-trial investigations. This position is fully correlated with the provisions of the concept of criminal justice reform. There are also examples from the practical activities of law enforcement agencies, which were the basis for this conclusion. The article also examines the issue of determining the time limits for the start of pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings and entering information into a single register of pre-trial investigations. The positions of scientists on this issue, which are quite different and sometimes polar, are analyzed. The author's attention is focused on certain difficulties that arise in law enforcement agencies during the proper initiation of criminal proceedings. It is emphasized that the term available in the current law for twenty-four hours is extremely insignificant for the correct determination of the qualification of the offense and its composition. It is proposed to increase the period to three days during which the investigator must enter information into the unified register of pre-trial investigations and initiate criminal proceedings. It is these time limits that must be sufficient for the investigator or prosecutor to properly comply with the requirements of the applicable criminal procedure law.


Author(s):  
Tatyana Plotnikova ◽  
Andrey Paramonov

In the current difficult conditions for the economy of our state, corruption crimes represent a higher level of danger. It is necessary to reform anti-corruption activities in order to increase its effectiveness. One of the radical measures in the field of anti-corruption will be the abolition of the presumption of innocence for corrupt illegal acts. The presumption of inno-cence is a fundamental and irremovable principle of criminal law, which is enshrined in article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. Violation of this principle is impossible for criminal proceedings, but modern circumstances require timely, prompt, and sometimes radical so-lutions. It is worth not to neglect the measures of “insuring” on the part of law enforcement agencies, since otherwise it will increase the share of cor-ruption crimes in law enforcement agencies. The content of paragraph 4 of article 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is man-datory even if the presumption of innocence for corruption crimes is can-celed: “A conviction cannot be based on assumptions”. At the same time, the principle of differentiation of punishment will be implemented by assigning the term of imprisonment from the minimum to the maximum, depending on the severity of the illegal act.


Yuridika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Bastianto Nugroho

The trial of a criminal case is to find out whether a criminal offense has occurred in an event, therefore in the most important criminal proceedings the proceedings are proved. Evidence is a problem that plays a role in the examination process in court because with this proof is determined the fate of a defendant. The legal function in the State of Indonesia is to regulate the order of society in the life of the nation and the state, whereas the violation of the law itself is an event that must exist in every society and is impossible to be eliminated absolutely, because violation of law is an integral part of development More complex. One of the provisions governing how the law enforcement officers carry out the task in the field of repressive is the criminal procedure law which has the purpose of searching and approaching material truth, the complete truth of a criminal case by applying the provisions of criminal procedure law honestly darn precisely with The purpose of finding out who the perpetrator can be charged with is a violation of the law. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-132
Author(s):  
V. A. Filatyev

The paper analyzes the provisions of the criminal procedure law determining the grounds and procedures for the application of preventive measures when deciding a sentence. The paper attempts to identify their constitutional and legal meaning. According to the author, the remand of a defendant in custody on the sole basis of the need to execute a real imprisonment sentence is unacceptable. Doctrinal representations of the theory of procedural decisions allow us to conclude that the decision on the measure of restraint cannot be taken simultaneously with the sentence and should not be an integral part of it. Under the current legal regulation, the defense is forced to refuse to express the position on the measure of restraint in the pleadings and the last plea if the position of the defendant is aimed at acquittal. The impossibility for the defense to make an immediate appeal on the formulated in the sentence decision on detention makes the appeal meaningless in general. Uncertainty of the procedure for sending persons sentenced to real imprisonment in all penal institutions but colony-settlements to the place of serving their sentence, for whom the court did not choose detention, reveals a gap in the law. The author claims that these and other defects in the legal regulation listed in the paper contribute to the existence of an accusatory bias in law enforcement practice, since they predetermine the detention decision and must be eliminated. Measures of restraint must be considered immediately after the verdict is sounded in a separate court session at the request of the prosecution or at the initiative of the court.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Tatyana Gennad’evna Borodinova ◽  
Anna Alexandrovna Petrikina ◽  
Vladimir Vladimirovich Borodinov ◽  
Irina Vladimirovna Gubko

The research reveals the peculiarities of interpretation of the criminal procedure norms emphasizing the practical importance. Its purpose is to identify and solve problems of law enforcement in criminal proceedings. The nature and types of interpretation of the criminal procedure norms were subjected to a detailed analysis based on the judicial and investigative practice. Difficulties with interpretation of the criminal procedure norms in connection with the legislative gaps, difficulties in the process of interpreting the cross-industry terms lack of digital information support of the newly published acts interpreting the norms of law and establishment of specific terms for its implementation, were singled out as separate problems. The use of a set of methods of scientific cognition was promotive of the achievement of the result. The conclusions show that the competent interpretation and application of the criminal procedure law by the courts, taking into account the specifics of this branch of law, can increase the efficiency of justice. The scientific novelty of this research is that for the first time, in an integrated manner and on the basis of a systematic analysis of the practice of interpretation and application of the norms of criminal law. It is planned to formulate proposals and recommendations to improve the work of the courts, law enforcement bodies and the advocacy suggesting specific measures to optimize the said direction.


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 70-79
Author(s):  
Yu. G. Torbin ◽  
A. A. Usachev ◽  
L. P. Plesneva

Despite the prolonged use of certain forms of interaction between the investigator and investigative agencies at the initial stage of pre-trial proceedings, the criminal procedure legislation still lacks some aspects of their implementation. This makes it necessary to study the current situation and substantiate the theoretical and practical provisions concerning interaction between an investigator and investigative agencies in the context of verification of the report of the crime in the light of the planned digitalization of domestic criminal proceedings. The author suggests that the forms of interaction, the application of which is expedient at the initial stage of pre-trial proceedings, include two procedural forms (giving written instructions to an investigative agency about carrying out operational search activities, obtaining explanations, obtaining assistance in carrying out investigative and other procedural actions) and two organizational forms (joint planning and formation of an investigative and task force). In order to increase the efficiency of criminal procedure at the initial stage of pre-trial proceedings, to ensure clarity of the language of criminal procedure law and its compliance with law enforcement, the auther proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by supplementing it with the right of authorized officials and bodies to give to investigative agencies mandatory written instructions for obtaining explanations, and to receive assistance from the investigative agency in carrying out verification actions. At the same time, the paper demonstrates the author’s approch to excluding obtaining explanations from the general list of procedural actions specified in Part 1 of Article 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and conducted by authorized subjects of verification of the report of the crime. Also, the paper analyzes the importance of introduction of electronic document circulation into criminal proceedings from the point of view of efficiency of interaction between the investigator and investigative authorities at the initial stage of pre-trial investigation.


Author(s):  
Alia R. Sharipova ◽  

The article deals with the comparative analysis of the procedure and grounds for reviewing court cases under new and newly discovered circumstances in criminal and arbitration, civil and administrative proceedings. The author proceeds from the idea of common fundamental beginnings of justice in general, and therefore, all types of judicial activities - including an extraordinary review of judicial decisions, which have entered into legal force. The branch specifics of specific procedural institutions should have a special explanation based on the specifics of the branch itself. The author thinks that there is no key basis for reviewing the case on the newly discovered circumstances in the criminal trial and attempts to replace it with one of the new circumstances. In this part, the current criminal procedure law differs unfavourably from the Soviet Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) of the RSFSR of 1960 - among the newly discovered circumstances, there are no those that could indicate a miscarriage of justice made out of direct connection with someone's criminal actions. In the current CPC of the Russian Federation, the list of newly discovered circumstances is closed, and the list of new circumstances that entail the review of the court decisions is, on the contrary, open. Examples of academic papers and administrative enactments justifying such a replacement are given. The author gives his arguments against it and proposes to change the list of grounds for revision, referring to the regulation in other procedural branches, historical and foreign experience. A significant procedural difference of the considered type of extraordinary review of cases in criminal proceedings from other types of proceedings is found. It is the need for applicants to request a review from the prosecutor, not from the court. The greatest objection is the non-alternative procedure: the prosecutor is a participant in the criminal proceedings on the part of the prosecution, he is responsible for the undoubted proof of the charge, which is the basis of the sentence, the abolition of which is requested by another interested person. The negative impact of the prosecutor's mediation between the complainant and the court on access to justice and its quality is argued. It is pointed out that there is no need for prosecutorial checks to resolve the issue of judicial review of the case. The analysis of judicial statistics in different branches of justice shows that criminal proceedings differ sharply by the negligible number of judicial review cases due to newly discovered and new circumstances. The article calls into question the ability to explain this fact by a higher quality of sentences in criminal cases in comparison with other court decisions in other court cases.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 109-114
Author(s):  
Oleh Batiuk ◽  

The author aimed to reveal the content and forms of use of special psychological knowledge during the proceeding of interrogation in the pre-trial investigation of crimes that encroach on the nationalsecurity of Ukraine in the provisions of the scientific article. Namely, for fulfilling the intended goal, the author determines in the provisions of the scientific article that the use of special psychological knowledge at the stage of pre-trial investigation, of course, can be the great benefit for establishing the truth in the case and the lack of their wide and effective application in criminal proceedings is caused, first of all, by imperfection of the theory of use of special psychological knowledge and of legal regulation of the activity of experts and other persons with special psychological knowledge. This is resulted from primarily to vague and ambiguous theoretical definitions of the concept of special psychological knowledge, subjects, methods of use and forms of their realization. Based on the analysis of theoretical and empirical material, scientifically substantiated conceptual and categorical apparatus concerning the concept of special psychological knowledge, which are used in pre-trial investigation, is defined; the conclusions and proposals that are aimed at improving the procedural and applied aspects of practical application by law enforcement agencies are formulated by the author in the scientific article. According to the author, this will not only deepen scientific knowledge, but also will give the opportunity to use the obtained data in investigative practice, help law enforcement agencies quickly and efficiently to disclose, investigate and conduct measures to prevent of the committing crimes against national security of Ukraine. The results of the research can also be applied during the criminal proceedings, in the process of proving and evaluating evidence, during the qualifying the committed crime and establishing of circumstances mitigating of punishment. The author explored the features of the use of special psychological knowledge during the investigation of the crimes that encroach on the national security of Ukraine, which are committed by the organized criminal group.


Author(s):  
S. V. Matveev ◽  
S. M. Kolotova

The Institute of extradition is one of the most important areas of international cooperation in the fight against crime, since this tool ensures the achievement of the fundamental principles of the criminal process, which include: the restoration of the rights of the victim violated by the crime, the application of fair punishment to the criminal, despite the differences in the legal regulation of this issue in the jurisdiction of different States. However, should the legal regulation currently, this institution does not have, and therefore the activities of law enforcement agencies in this part cause certain difficulties.The article analyzes some features of the legal regulation of the institution of extradition in the criminal process of the Russian Federation, identifies current problems of theory and practice of application. In addition, the author suggests ways to solve the problems of legal regulation of this institution. Attention is focused on the need to make changes not only to the legislative framework, but also to modernize the extradition mechanism itself. In addition, the current issues that arise in the course of the extradition procedure, both at the request of the Russian Federation and foreign States, are considered. 


Author(s):  
Ulmas Sharipov ◽  

The purpose of writing this article is to show that in practice the law enforcement agencies conducting pre-trial investigation and preliminary investigation do not strictly follow the detention procedure established by the Code of Criminal Procedure, although the grounds for detaining detainees are not sufficient. by deciding to detain the accused and allegedly facilitating the preliminary investigation through this "method", ie the violation of the rights and interests of the suspects and accused persons involved in the criminal proceedings as a result of the discovery of the crime and the use of suspects as a means of proving guilt being put. The main purpose of writing this article is to prevent these cases and to amend the legislation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document