Powers of the Prosecutor in Preparing for Trial in the Legislation of Judicial Reform in the XIX and XX Centuries in Russia [

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.M. Varpakhovskaya ◽  
◽  
V.M. Derevskova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Subsequent Stage ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Complex Procedure ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Xix Century

The subject of the study is the powers of the prosecutor at the stage of preparation for trials, which occupies an intermediate position between the stage of a preliminary investigation and a trial. The authors analyze the legal norms contained in the Statute of Criminal Proceedings of 1864 and related to the powers of the prosecutor at the stage of a trial. It is concluded that the prosecutor had broad powers during the period under review, which was the result of the transition from the investigative to the adversarial form of the process, and the complex procedure of bringing the accused to a trial was aimed at preventing unjustified bringing of the person to a trial. It is indicated that such a decision of the legislator of the XIX century and the powers of the prosecutor at this stage were differently evaluated by contemporaries of the judicial reform of 1864, and are ambiguously evaluated at the present time. The analysis of the Soviet legislation (the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR of 1922, the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR of 1923 and Criminal Procedure Code of the RSFSR of 1960), the comparison of the approaches of the previous stage to understanding the role and powers of the prosecutor in the trial stage are carried out. The authors pay attention to the fact that the Soviet legislator retained both the stage itself and its name, but changed the powers in the direction of their reduction, and in comparison with the subsequent stage, the reduction in the powers of the prosecutor was not so significant. It is indicated that initially the Russian legislator, when formulating the provisions of the concept of judicial reform in 1991, sought to abandon the Soviet experience and return to the experience of the Russian Empire, but this did not happen. It is noted that the adopted Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of 2001 and the subsequent changes in the criminal procedure legislation were aimed at changing not only the name and content of the stage under consideration, but also reducing the powers of the prosecutor, which are currently mainly implemented during the preliminary hearing.

scholarly journals ON SOME COMMENTS ON THE NORMATIVE FORMULATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1(63)) ◽  
pp. 127-133
Author(s):  
Виктор Николаевич ГРИГОРЬЕВ
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Situation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The purpose of Russian criminal proceedings, which is very important among the modern social and legal institutions, is nevertheless deficient in its legal and regulatory form. It is noted that in the modern situation, some formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings have come into conflict with the real social and legal reality. Purpose: to resolve contradictions between the formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings and the actual social and legal reality. Methods: the author uses the methods of dialectical and formal logic, comparison, description, observation, interviewing, experiment, analysis, interpretation. Results: a theoretical basis has been developed for the choice, in the event of a conflict between the formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings and the actual social and legal situation, of whether to change the normative formulation of the purpose of criminal proceedings or whether to change the procedure itself. In choosing the subject of reform, preference is given to traditional Russian values. Modern trends in Russian criminal proceedings do not fully reflect the needs of civil society in the Russian Federation. It is more accurate to assume that this is the result of a system of departmental and bureaucratic measures to distribute influence and burden. From a humanitarian standpoint, it would be more correct to return the criminal justice system to a state where it will again reflect the lost purpose, in particular, protecting individuals from unlawful accusations. The first step should be to remove from law enforcement officials the obligation to be unilateral in the examination of evidence and to represent only one party – the accusation (Chapter 6 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), as well as to remove the normative prohibition for the preliminary investigation and inquiry bodies to gather evidence defending the accused (Part 2 article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

Genesis of the Criminal Procedure on Liability of Legal Persons on Russia

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Ольга Семыкина ◽  
Olga Semykina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Remedial Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Positive Assessment ◽  
Legal Entities

The article deals with the legislative and doctrinal precondition of criminal liability of legal persons, which are accumulated a concept formed the basis of the judicial reform of 1864. The author studies the practice the first phase of the introduction in to the Russian criminal procedure enforcement of the measures applicable to legal persons for acts committed during preliminary investigation of crimes. In this context, the article lays emphasis on the norms of the Charter of criminal proceedings of 1864, which contain the procedural peculiarities of the application of such a measures to legal entities as closure, as well as monitors the judicial practice on the criminal liability of legal persons. The article gives a positive assessment of the approach of the legislator to the possibility of the implementation of remedial measures in criminal proceedings on such corruption crimes as crimes against property and income of the treasury. Given these positions, the author comes to the conclusion of the possibility of application of measures of criminal procedure liability of legal persons under preliminary investigation in criminal cases of crimes that infringe on budget forming industries.

scholarly journals Development of National Procedural Law in the Second Half of the XIX – Early XX Centuries

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. 156-164
Author(s):  
Д. В. Слинько ◽  
Л. І. Калєніченко
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Substantive Law

The authors have studied one of the current historical and legal problems concerning the development of procedural law in the Ukrainian lands, which were part of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian Empires in the second half of the XIX – early XX centuries. Based on the analysis of scientific literature and relevant regulatory material, it has been noted that the beginning of the reform of procedural legislation of the Russian Empire can be considered the introduction of the institution of forensic investigators by the imperial decree in June 1860. Thus, the preliminary investigation was separated from the police, and investigators were part of the staff of the judicial department. The next stage was the judicial reform of 1864. As a result of the reform, the judicial system and procedural law were completely changed. Substantive law was also partially amended under that influence; there was the separation of criminal proceedings from the civil one; procedural norms of administrative justice began to be formed in the Ukrainian lands during that period, and a new branch of knowledge within legal science emerged, which was aimed at searching for the essence and nature of procedural law. The development of procedural law in the Ukrainian lands, which were part of the Austrian and, since 1868, the Austro-Hungarian Empires, was characterized by the obsolescence and imperfection of procedural legislation and its focus on the establishment of imperial positions. At the same time, it is possible to state its certain democracy and succession. It has been concluded that national procedural law during that period was characterized by the preservation and strengthening of certain features of the medieval process (secular nature, rationality, phasing), by the separation of procedural law from the substantive, by the formation of procedural branches of law, by the codification of procedural legislation, by the separation of administrative proceedings from criminal and civil proceedings; the functions and competence of the authorities and their officials were differentiated.

scholarly journals ON A PROSECUTOR AS A SUBJECT OF PROVING ON PRE-TRIAL STAGES OF A NATIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 27-30
Author(s):  
Aleksey A. Zakharyan ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Forensic Tools ◽  
The Right

The participation of the prosecutor in the criminal process covers both his judicial and pre-trial stages. It is well known that the prosecutor in the Russian criminal process acts as the subject of evidence, not only as the state prosecutor, but mainly as the person conducting the criminal process or observing (supervising) his proceedings in the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings. In the doctrine of the Russian criminal process, starting with the Charter of the Criminal Procedure of 1864 and up to and including the modern Code of Criminal Procedure of 2001, the prosecutor, to one degree or another, acted as a full-fledged subject of evidence in the preliminary investigation. In the current legal regulation of the prosecutor, despite a number of sign if I can t deformations of his procedural status, it can be attributed to full-fledged subjects of evidence. After the well-known reform of June 5, 2007, which significantly affected the procedural status of the prosecutor at the pre-trial stages of the criminal process, the prosecutor, in the opinion of many well-known procedural scientists (the positions will be given in the presentation of the material), ceased to be a full-fledged subject of proof, since the participation of the prosecutor in evidence is associated with the availability of authority to collect, verify and evaluate evidence. The Russian prosecutor is deprived of forensic tools, he does not have the right to independently collect evidence by carrying out investigative actions, and in relation to the investigation he is deprived of even the authority to give the investigator binding instructions on collecting and verify in evidence. Based on the objectives of the study, the author assesses the content of the powers of the prosecutor as the subject of evidence in the pretrial stages of Russian criminal proceedings When writing the article, the author used general scientific methods (analysis, induction, deduction and others and private scientific methods (formal logical, comparative, legal). Based on analysis of the latest trend since forming the pre-trial stages of the criminal process of foreign countries, it is proposed to clarify the procedural status of the prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The article is turned out to a scientific search for the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or accused" through the study of the essence of reconciliation and role in criminal proceedings thereof. The author notes that criminal procedural law (until 2012) had been proclaimed another approach to reconciliation between victim and suspect, not involved a dispute procedure as a conflict, the result of which can be reached by compromise and understanding through reconciliation. It is stated that one of the ways to resolve the legal conflict in committing a criminal offense was the opportunity to reach a compromise between the victim and the suspect (the accused) by concluding a reconciliation agreement between them, provided by the Code of Сriminal Procedure of Ukraine (2012). The main attention is placed on the shortcoming of the domestic criminal procedure law which is the lack of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or the accused", which can be eliminated only through examining the essence or legal nature of reconciliation in criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the current legislation and modern views on the institution of reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the author's definition of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement" is proposed. Thus, “The conciliation agreement is an agreement in criminal proceedings concluded between the victim and the suspect or the accused person on their own initiative in relation to crimes of minor or medium gravity and in criminal proceedings in the form of private prosecution, the subject of which is the compensation of harm caused by wrongdoing or committing other actions not related to compensation for the damage that the suspect or the accused is obliged to commit in favor of the victim, in exchange for an agreed punishment and sentencing thereof or sentencing thereof and relief from serving a sentence with probation, as well as the statutory consequences of conclusion and approval of the agreement".

FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE FORMATION ANDSIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE AND LEGAL INSTITUTION OF JUDICIAL REPRESENTATION IN THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE OF THE XIX CENTURY

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4(73)) ◽  
pp. 64-69
Author(s):  
A.V. Sosnin
Keyword(s):  
Legal Profession ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Political Work ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
Source Studies ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Xix Century

The subject of the study establishes the nature of the legal profession, peculiarities of formation of the legal profession of the nineteenth century, and the conditions past development of the legal profession in the Russian Empire and the first steps in the reformation of jury legal profession, providing information on references to judicial representation in the oldest monuments of the Russian Empire of the XIX century. Some features of the judicial counter-reform of 1864, which served as the beginning of the emergence and appearance of the juried bar, are described. The problems worthy on the way of self-origin and improvement of legal Institute of bar, the developed aspects of the organization and work of bar in the course of its formation were revealed. The embodiment of the ancient and later foundations of independence, the legality of corporatism, self-government and equality of lawyers. The test of reconstruction of one of the first and important legal institutions of representation of judicial and source studies of the Russian Empire is carried out. The key conclusions that determined the practice of our time, state political work, which formed the basis of the judicial and legal system of the state, are established.

DEFINITIONS OF CATEGORIES PURPOSE AND TASKS OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE MODERN CRIMINAL PROCESS

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Svitlana Patiuк ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Modern Theory ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
State Changes ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Goals And Objectives ◽  
Functional Purpose

"Definitions of categories, the goal and objectives of criminal proceedings in modern criminal proceedings" analysed the legal norms and provisions of doctrinal concepts to determine the goals and objectives of criminal proceedings. The author formulated conclusions and generalizations that since criminal proceedings are a sphere of state activity, it depends on the direction of the political course of the state, changes in state policy, which always leads to a change in the ideology of the criminal process as a whole, including the transformation of goals and objectives criminal proceedings. The purpose and objectives of criminal proceedings depend on the historical form of the criminal process, a common feature of which is the ratio of freedom (interests) of the individual and the state, expressed in the procedural position of the main participants in the process. Criminal procedure legislation and doctrine define the resolution of a dispute (conflict) between the state and the accused arising as a result of the commission of a crime as the goal of the criminal process in most countries in which the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings prevails. As the goal of criminal proceedings in the modern theory of criminal procedure, it is proposed to consider the protection of the individual, society and the state from criminal offences in the settlement of criminal-legal conflicts arising as a result of these offences. The goal in the criminal process determines the setting of tasks and represents the ultimate conclusion from the sum of all the tasks being implemented. The task of criminal proceedings should be determined taking into account the functional purpose of the subjects of criminal proceedings, and therefore the task is the fulfilment of his duty by a participant in criminal proceedings, which is determined by his functional purpose, based on the principle of competition of the parties.

scholarly journals Prohibition of interrogation of notaries as witnesses in criminal proceedings

1970 ◽  
pp. 345-349
Author(s):  
Ulyana Polyak
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Notary Public ◽  
Made In

The current criminal procedure law of Ukraine stipulates that a witness is obliged to give a true testimony during pre-trial investigation and trial, however, the legislator made an exception for this by specifying the categories of persons who have been granted immunity from immunity, ie they are released by law. testify. The article deals with the problems of law and practice regarding the prohibition of the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings and the release of him from the obligation to keep the notarial secret by the person who entrusted him with the information which is the subject of this secret. The notion of notarial secrecy is proposed to be changed, since the subject of this secrecy is not only information that became known to the notary public from the interested person, but also those information that the notary received from other sources in the performance of their professional duties, as well as the procedural activity of the notary himself, is aimed at achieving a certain legal result. The proposal made in the legal literature to supplement the CPC of Ukraine with the provisions that a notary is subject to interrogation as a witness on information that constitutes a notarial secret, if the notarial acts were declared illegal in accordance with the procedure established by law The proposal to increase the list of persons who are not subject to interrogation as witnesses about the information constituting a notarial secret is substantiated, this clause is proposed to be supplemented by provisions that, apart from the notary, are not notarized, other notarials, notaries as well as the persons mentioned in Part 3 of Art. 8 of the Law of Ukraine "On Notary". Amendments to the current CPC of Ukraine by the amendments proposed in this publication will significantly improve the law prohibiting the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings, as well as improve certain theoretical provisions of the institute of witness immunity in criminal proceedings.

Termination of Criminal Proceedings in Public Criminal Cases by Courts of First Instance Under Art. 24, Para. 1, Item 5 of the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure and Its Compliance with European Union Law

De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Debora Valkova-Terzieva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Subject

The subject of this research is a specific prerequisite for the termination of criminal proceedings in public criminal cases, regulated in Article 24, Paragraph 1, Item 5 of the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure. This analysis was necessitated by the fact that the European Union had introduced certain obligations for the Member States.

Limits of proof in criminal proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
Aleksei Marochkin ◽  
Viktoriya Slyvnaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Reasonable Doubt ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Research Activity ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Evidence Collection ◽  
The Subject ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Moment

Problem setting. Proving in criminal proceedings is evidence collection and research activity of special subjects of criminal proceedings. The specific purpose of prooving is to obtain knowledge that is close to reality. To achieve this purpose, the theory of criminal procedure operates with the concept of “limits of proof”. In view of the above, it is important to study this phenomenon, because, firstly, there is no legislative regulation, and secondly, there is no unity in the theory of criminal procedure on this issue. Target research. The aim of the work is to define the concept of the limits of proof; to find out the moment of reaching the limits of proof and cases of narrowing and expanding the limits of proof; to analyze case law on this issue. Analysis of recent research and publication. The question of determining the limits of proof, their relationship with the subject of prooving has been the subject of scientific research. In particular, the works of such researchers in the field of criminal procedure as A.R. Belkin, V.V. Vapnarchuk, G.F. Gorsky, Yu.M. Groshev, V.S. Zelenetsky, E.G. Kovalenko, L.D. Kokorev, R.V. Kostenko, R.D. Rakhunov, В.В. Rozhnov, V.G. Tanasovich, F.N. Fatkullin, A.A. Khmirov deserve attention. Article’s main body. The article discusses the concept and significance of the limits of proof in criminal proceedings, analyzes the differences between them and other procedural categories, and analyzes doctrinal developments regarding the criteria for reaching boundaries and judicial practice in cases of expanding or narrowing the limits of proof. Conclusions and prospect of development. Thus, the study allows us to state that the concept of the limits of proof in criminal proceedings is multifaceted and important because it aims to achieve fair trial. The limits of proof are individual for each specific criminal proceeding, and an important criterion for determining it is the standard of proof of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt”. That is why the future study of this phenomenon in criminal proceedings becomes relevant due to the need to bring national criminal proceedings closer to European standards of justice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document