Appeal to a Court Decisions, Actions (Inaction) of Inquiry Officers and Bodies of Inquiry of the Federal Bailiff Service in the Order Provided by Art. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-104
Author(s):  
A.S. Glukhov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Russian Federation

SHORTENED TIMELINE OF APPEAL AGAINST INTERIM COURT DECISIONS MADE AT A PRE-TRIAL STAGE OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Medical Organization ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the problem of classifying interim decisions among those that are appealed in a shortened timeline, and determining the list of such decisions, as well as the closely related problem of determining the rules for calculating such a shortened timeline. Currently, the Criminal Procedure law provides for the possibility of appealing a number of interim decisions made at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings before the final decision Moreover, for appealing some interim decisions at a pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings, a general period of appeal is provided - 10 days from the date of the court decision, or the same period from the date of serving with a copy of the decision the person who is in custody, while for others a shortened timeline is 3 days from the date of the decision. Meanwhile, it follows from the literal interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation that within a shortened three-day period, court decisions on the election of preventive measures in the form of a ban on certain actions, bail, house arrest, detention, the refusal to apply them or extend their application can be appealed. At the same time, such a conclusion is not confirmed either in the positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation or in judicial practice. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedure law, the position of the Supreme and Constitutional Courts of the Russian Federation, scientific literature and practice, several problems are highlighted. Thus, the author states the discrepancy between the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation when it comes to establishing the terms for appealing the court decision on a preventive measure in the form of bail. In addition, there is no single criterion for establishing shortened deadlines for appealing interim decisions, and there-fore, the list of such decisions requires analysis. In addition, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a norm that determines the rules for calculating daily terms. The author formulates several proposals for amendments. It is proposed to determine the criteria for a shortened appeal timeline as the restriction of the constitutional right to liberty and immunity of a person that requires the immediate judicial review of the lawfulness of such a decision. It is also necessary to correct the phrasing of Article 106 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the procedure for applying a preventive measure in the form of bail, and establish the rule that appeal against such an interim court decision is filed according to the rules of Chapter 45.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code within ten days. The list of court decisions which must be appealed in a shortened timeline must be expanded by a court decision on putting a suspect or an accused into a medical organization providing medical or psychiatric care in hospital settings for forensic examination, as well as the extension of a person’s stay in a medical organization. In addition, the author has analyzed the approaches to the calculation of daily terms and proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation by establishing a single procedure for calculating daily terms, which does not take into account the day that served as a starting point of the term.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF LEGISLATIVE REGULATION OF DETENTION OF PERSONS PERFORMING CERTAIN TYPES OF PUBLIC LEGAL ACTIVITY

2020 ◽  
pp. 41-48
Author(s):  
Владимир Юрьевич Стельмах
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legislative Regulation ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

В статье рассматриваются вопросы нормативного регулирования избрания меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу в отношении лиц, выполняющих определенные виды публично-правовой деятельности и в силу этого наделенных законодательством иммунитетом от уголовного преследования; порядок рассмотрения компетентными государственными органами ходатайств органов предварительного расследования и прокуратуры о лишении лица иммунитета от уголовного преследования; анализируются положения уголовно-процессуального закона и иных нормативных актов, регламентирующих правовой статус лиц, обладающих данным иммунитетом. Особое внимание уделяется порядку избрания меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу в отношении членов Совета Федерации, депутатов Государственной Думы и судей. Предлагаются корректировки уголовно-процессуального закона и закрепление положений об обязательности получения согласия компетентного государственного органа на избрание, а не на исполнение меры пресечения в виде заключения под стражу. The article deals with the problems of regulatory regulation of detention of persons performing certain types of public legal activities, for which immunity from criminal prosecution is established. The special features of the detention of these persons are provided for by the Criminal Procedure Act, as well as other normative acts. At present, the law establishes that a court decision on detention against members of the Federation Council, deputies of the State Duma and judges is executed with the consent of the Chamber of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation or the qualification board of judges. Taking into account the principle of the independence of the court and the obligation of court decisions, it is proposed to amend the law and to provide for the consent of these bodies to choose this preventive measure, rather than to implement the court decision.

Procedural Costs Associated with the Payment of Labor of the Representative of the Victim Participant in the Proceedings in Accordance with Part 21 of Article 45 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
S. R. Zelenin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedural Costs ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
A Minor

The participation in a criminal case of a lawyer appointed by a representative of a minor victim is regulated by the new part 21 of article 45 of the code of criminal procedure. The procedure for compensation and recovery from the convicted person of the procedural costs associated with the payment of such a representative»s labor remains problematic due to the lack of comprehensive research on this topic. Examples of court decisions are given that testify to the inconsistency of judicial practice on these issues. A comparative study and systematic analysis of the law allows the author to conclude that there are no obstacles to recovering these costs from the convicted person, as well as suggest changes to the wording of the rule of law.

The Requirement of Legality of Decisions of the Criminal Court: The Legal Basis and Content Components

2021 ◽  
pp. 213-224
Author(s):  
Sergey V. Burmagin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Russian Science ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

Legality as a complex legal requirement to judicial decisions, developed for a long time by Russian science and legal practice, was formally consolidated in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in 2001 and extended to all decisions of the criminal court. However, the wording of the law does not fully and adequately reflect the content of this requirement, and to some extent it contradicts the established scientific ideas and needs of judicial practice. In this regard, the author aims to reveal the content side of the concept of legality of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings, both from a historical perspective and from the perspective of modern legal understanding, and to justify the need to adjust the legislative expression of this requirement. The research problems are solved using historical, dialectical and comparative legal methods of cognition based on the analysis of relevant theoretical concepts developed by the Russian science of criminal procedure law, the provisions of criminal procedure legislation and the legal positions of the judicial authorities: the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, federal courts of general jurisdiction. The legal sources of regulatory requirements that the criminal court should follow when making procedural decisions have been identified. The author substantiates the need for an expanded understanding of the legality of judicial decisions as their compliance not only with direct instructions of the law, but also with legal provisions contained in other forms of law: constitutional norms, generally recognized principles and norms of international law, established legal customs, as well as standards of justice developed by judicial practice and legal positions on specific issues of law enforcement. In the context of historical development, the material and procedural aspects of the requirement of legality of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings are analyzed and its content components are formulated. Continuity and at the same time dynamism of doctrinal and legislative approaches to determining the legality of court decisions supported by judicial practice are noted. Certain shortcomings of the normative consolidation of the requirement of legality of court decisions in the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are revealed, in connection with which specific proposals are made to change and optimize certain formulations of the procedural law that determine the content of the requirement of legality of a sentence and other court decisions in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals On the Right of the Accused Parties to an Appeal of Interim Court Decisions Made at the Pre-Trial Stage: Protection of Private and Public Interests

2020 ◽  
pp. 47-52
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Of Appeal

The article examines the problem of determining the list of participants on the part of the prosecution, endowed with the right to appeal the interim decisions made at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings. Currently, the appeal and revision of interim decisions are carried according to Chapter 45.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. However, Chapter does not take into account the specificity of the preliminary investigation stage, in particular, the subject composition of its participants. As a result, the list of the subjects entitled to appeal of the interim court decisions at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings remains controversial. The article discusses the right of the investigator and the head of the investigative body to file an appeal as well as the right of the victim to initiate proceedings in the court of appeal in defense of private interest. Drawing on the analysis of literature and practices of appealing interim court decisions, the author identifies the problems of theory and practice, including: 1) the prosecutor’s right to appeal is not sufficient to ensure tp protect public interests; 2) the controversial right of the investigator, or the head of the investigative body to file a complaint with the court of appeal; 3) there is no legal obligation of state bodies to notify the victim about the initiation of a petition before the court for a preventive measure or an investigative action, which may prevent the victim from exercising their right to appeal. The author proposes: 1) to supplement the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation with a list of subjects for filing (presenting) a complaint of interim decisions, including the investigator as the main participant in the process at the stage of preliminary investigation; 2) to legislate the investigator’s obligation to notify the victim about the initiation of a petition before the court for the application of a preventive measure, placement of the accused in a hospital for an examination, etc., as well as the obligation of the court to send the victim copies of decisions on these petitions.

The main problems of operational-search counteraction to bribery in Russia (based on the example of the practice materials in the Komi Republic)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-157
Author(s):  
Vladimir Danko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Komi Republic ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Subject And Object ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Object Of Crime

The work is carried out on the basis of special methods of knowledge, including historical-legal, logical, formal-legal. In the article, taking into account scientific sources and practical experience, the legal problems of operative-search counteraction to crimes provided for in Article 290-291.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered. The analysis of bribery is realized jointly, because there are identical characteristics in all its corpus delicties – the same subject and object of crime. The existing norms of criminal and criminal procedure laws in relation to bribery are analyzed. Principal operative-search measures used in documentation of bribery are determined. They are surveillance and operational experiment. Their difference is justified and successful use examples are examined. An actual statistics of the Komi Republic for 2015-2018 is given. The lack of normative securing for interaction between operational subdivisions and preliminary investigation body is ascertained. Based on personal practical experience some measures to counteract bribery are proposed.

Features of the election of such preventive measure as house arrest in relation to minors

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-157
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Manohina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
A Minor

In the article, the author turns to the study of the peculiarities of choosing such a preventive measure as house arrest for minors. Due to the fact that the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation does not precisely define cases when a court must elect a house arrest in relation to minors, in practice there are often difficulties in which cases to choose such a preventive measure as detention, and in which house arrest. In the work, the author attempts to determine the essence of such a preventive measure as house arrest and the peculiarities of his election in relation to minors, and also considers the prohibitions and (or) restrictions to which minors cannot be subjected. The positions contained in the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court “On the practice of the application by the courts of legislation on preventive measures in the form of detention, house arrest and bail” are analyzed. The author expresses the opinion that it is inadvisable to choose such a preventive measure as house arrest for minors. Based on the study, the author makes recommendations on the possibility, at the discretion of the court, to make adjustments to the prohibitions and (or) restrictions to which a minor suspect or accused will be subjected to whom such a preventive measure as house arrest is chosen.

Ensuring the Rights and Legal Interests of the Victim when Checking the Crime Report: A Comparative Legal Analysis of the Criminal Procedure Codes of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China

2021 ◽  
pp. 128-133
Author(s):  
Irina G. Smirnova ◽  
◽  
Ekaterina V. Alekseeva ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedure Codes

The article presents a comparative legal analysis of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedure Code of the People’s Republic of China, which regulate the rights and powers of the victim within the framework of the stage of initiating a criminal case. The authors highlight several significant differences in the legal regulation of this issue. The differences are: the obligation to comply with the rules of jurisdiction in China at the stage of filing a statement of a crime, which is not required under the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; compulsory fingerprinting of a person when filing a crime report with a public security agency implemented in China; the existence of several types of preliminary checks (the list of activities carried out as part of these checks in China is open); intensive development of IT technologies and their introduction into the life of society, including for the fight against crime and ensuring law and order in society, in China.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document