scholarly journals Criminal prosecution in cases of economic crimes

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3B) ◽  
pp. 664-668
Author(s):  
Nikolay Grigorievich Kadnikov ◽  
Viktor Victorovich Pushkarev ◽  
Anna Vladilenovna Skachko ◽  
Alexey Igorevich Morozov ◽  
Viktor Ivanovich Bezryadin

The article examines the significant problems of the initiating and termination of criminal prosecution in pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases of economic crimes. The author concludes that it is necessary to correct the criminal procedure legislation in order to exclude the possibility of using criminal prosecution as a means of pressure on businesses and entrepreneurs. New norms of criminal procedure law are formulated to achieve this goal.

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-39
Author(s):  
Ismail Ghonu ◽  
Andi Muhammad Sofyan ◽  
Nur Azisa

The research issue focuses on the examination of crown witnesses in the process of establishing criminal cases in Indonesia. The examination of the crown witnesses is necessary because law enforcement officers find it difficult to find evidence, other than the testimony of witnesses of the perpetrators themselves in order to find material truth that can be justified. The result of the research shows that the role of the crown witness in the criminal prosecution process is very significant, that is to find the material truth, so that the fast and simple proof process fulfills the minimum standard of proof, upholds public justice against the perpetrators and determines the demands of each actor in accordance with its role. The need for legal protection against the crown witness and the need for a policy of reform of criminal procedure law through the refinement of the Criminal Procedure Code relating to the content of witness material of the crown firmly and limitatively in the future. Keywords: Evidence; Criminal; Crown Witness


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 495-513
Author(s):  
Yu. V. Derishev

In November 2019, the world legal community widely celebrated the 125th anniversary of Professor M. S. Strogovich, who, according to his scientific colleagues and students, was a scientist who was “ahead of time”.This article provides a retrospective and comparative analysis of the positions of M. S. Strogovich and his colleagues on certain problems of domestic criminal proceedings, in particular its pre-trial phase, in the context of the direct influence of the scientist's scientific heritage on the development of modern criminal procedure law. The Author of the article particularly interesting views of the scientist and his participation in discussions related to defining the essence and purpose of the preliminary investigation, the implementation of the functions of preliminary investigation in relation to criminal prosecution, the problems of implementation of the principles of presumption of innocence and the adversarial nature of pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases, and, finally, the General Manager of the “investigative case” in modern Russia.M. S. Strogovich consistently adhered to the idea of the need to develop and strengthen procedural guarantees of individual rights, guarantees of justice, and this can be seen in this article. Thus, defining the essence of the criminal process as a system of actions of the relevant officials and the procedural legal relations that arise in connection with them, which in itself was a serious “scientific courage” of those years, M. S. Strogovich particularly defended the position that all participants in criminal proceedings are subjects of the rights granted to them and the duties assigned to them, and they should not be considered objects of unilateral power of officials. This idea has become widespread and generally accepted as the basic definition of domestic (Soviet and Russian) criminal proceedings.The article analyzes M. S. Strogovich’s scientific steps on the conceptual turn from revolutionary-radical ideas about the construction of criminal proceedings to its classical canons and traditions of the Russian criminal process, On the basis of which the conclusion is made about the indispensable use of the scientist's legacy in modernьRussian procedural studies.The research of M. S. Strogovich’s legacy carried out in the article will fully allow to rethink the modern system of criminal proceedings in a new way, can be used as a kind of key to finding solutions to law-making and law enforcement problems, for the further development of the national science of criminal procedure law.


2020 ◽  
pp. 66-70
Author(s):  
Mikhail S. Spiridonov ◽  

With the introduction of continuous cassation in criminal cases on 01 October 2019, the content of the verification of the validity of the cassation complaint and presentation has changed. The science of criminal procedure has been faced with a new problem: to assess the effectiveness of legal regulation, in which the validity of the cassation complaint or presentation is verified directly at the hearing, not at the preliminary stage. The object of this research is criminal procedural relations that develop in the implementation of the norms of criminal procedure law that regulate cassation proceedings in criminal procedure. The research focuses on the norms of the constitutional and criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation, domestic and foreign legislation, generally recognized principles and norms of international law governing cassation proceedings, provisions of the science of criminal law and criminal procedure. The aim of the research is to reveal the essence of the introduced legislative changes concerning the stage of verification of the validity of the cassation complaint or presentation, to develop proposals for improving the legislation. The methods of analysis, synthesis and comparison were applied to determine the procedure for the verification of the validity of the cassation complaint or presentation by the court of the cassation instance. The comparative legal method was employed to study foreign forms of cassation proceedings. The formal legal method was used to analyze the content of the texts of normative legal acts regulating cassation proceedings. The research resulted in the following conclusions. The lack of a stage for assessing the validity of the cassation complaint (presentation) and the grounds for its transfer to the cassation court excessively strengthens the revision principle and shifts the balance towards the task of identifying and eliminating violations of the requirements for the final court decision. The solution to this problem is possible through the introduction of written cassation proceedings carried out by a panel of three judges, which will consider the issue of admissibility and validity of the complaint (presentation).


Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
Ya. M. Ploshkina ◽  
L. V. Mayorova

The paper considers the second attempt made by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in terms of introducing the concept of criminal misconduct into the Russian criminal and criminal procedure legislation, examines the goals of its introduction. The authors conclude that the introduction of a criminal offense in the draft law No. 1112019-7 will entail the need to review some approaches in Russian law: the legal nature of the crime, the ratio of a criminal offense with a minor act and an administrative offense, the elements of a crime with administrative prejudice, the principle of justice. It seems possible to achieve procedural effectiveness, reduce the burden on judges and protect the rights of victims without introducing a criminal offense within the existing criminal and criminal procedural mechanisms related to exemption from criminal liability and expansion of non-rehabilitating grounds for termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution. It seems possible to use the already established categorization of crimes in relation to crimes of small and medium gravity. In terms of expanding the grounds for terminating a criminal case or criminal prosecution, it is appropriate to use the experience of the German legislator, which provides for the possibility of terminating criminal prosecution on grounds of expediency when the accused fulfills various duties and regulations assigned to him. In German criminal procedure law, the termination of criminal prosecution on grounds of expediency when assigning duties or prescriptions to the accused is the right of the relevant officials and bodies, and not their obligation, since in fact it is an alternative to criminal prosecution. This will allow it to be terminated at a certain stage in the case when there are all legal grounds for criminal prosecution.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 3-6
Author(s):  
Elena V. Markovicheva ◽  

The article reveals the possibilities of using conciliation technologies on minors in Russian criminal proceedings. The author analyzes the statutes of the draft law aimed at reforming the criminal procedure law and assesses the prospects for the use of special conciliation procedures as an alternative to criminal prosecution of minors.


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 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-105
Author(s):  
Nikolay N. Kovtun

This work critically assesses the legal nature and practice of the institution of bringing as a defendant in criminal proceedings in Russia, particularly in its relation to the substantive legal act of bringing to criminal responsibility. The author argues that, due to the general bureaucratization of the process, both the first and second acts have actually lost their original purpose to be the determining material and procedural guarantee of individual and justice in criminal proceedings. Objectifying as a legal fiction, the act of bringing the accused as an accused in the doctrine of Russian criminal procedure law, done directly in practice, is increasingly characterized as an accusation of duty, initial, intermediate, and final, which respectively form the ideas of duty, intermediate, initial, and investigative-final criminal prosecution. This negates the role of the named defining acts. Hence, the paper suggests an optimal mechanism for their implementation according to the purposes and tasks of substantive and procedural law


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 646-649
Author(s):  
Alexander Yurevich Epihin ◽  
Oleg Aleksandrovich Zaitsev ◽  
Ekaterina Pavlovna Grishina ◽  
Andrey Viktorovich Mishin ◽  
Gulnar Isaevna Aliyeva

Purpose: In article current trends of application of the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation in compliance with the purpose of criminal legal proceedings and in the context of counteraction corruption and prevention of abuse of the law of the officials who are carrying out criminal prosecution and judicial review and permission of criminal cases are stated. Methodology: In the course of the research of problematic issues and statements of the material of the article the dialectic, comparative and legal, law modeling, logical, inductive and deductive methods were used. Result: As shows investigative and judicial practicians there are enough the facts of unreasonable initiation of legal proceedings concerning businessmen, with an application of measures of criminal procedure coercion (arrest on the property, blocking of bank accounts and so forth) which result is crash of firm. Change of territorial jurisdiction of consideration of the case of another region by the court is directed to the elimination of a possibility of rendering an impact on objectivity of adjudication. Casual distribution of participation of the lawyer in a criminal case to a destination (when he has to be present surely for protection of the defendant) promotes impartiality of realization of the function of protection in pre-judicial production. The intention of the legislator to enter the obligatory video protocol of court session is directed to a performance by all participants of the process of legal instructions and duties will eliminate possible manifestations of corruption character by officials. Applications: This research can be used for universities, teachers, and students. Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of Anti-Corruption The Criminal Procedure Legislation of Russia is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-185
Author(s):  
Elena V. Pavlova

The article deals with individual issues of the tactics of participation of the prosecutor the public prosecutor in the basis of the part of the judicial investigation in criminal cases, which is connected with the presentation of evidence of the prosecution. It is noted that at present in the matter of determining the order of examining evidence by the parties, a unified position has been formed of both theorists and practitioners. They recognize the complete independence of the parties to determine this procedure in accordance with the tactics chosen by them. At the same time, the author draws attention to the fact that theoretical and methodical works still do not pay enough attention to the content and essence of this activity of the prosecutor in court, despite their obvious importance. His activity in the judicial investigation largely depends on the importance of tactical methods of presenting evidence and the ability to apply them. If he does not have the appropriate professional baggage, he will have considerable difficulty in the adversary process. The author sets out his own position regarding the content of evidence presented by the prosecutor the public prosecutor, proposes to include a definition of the relevant concept in the terminological apparatus of science of criminal procedure law and to fix it in the criminal procedure law. A derivative of it is the definition of the notion of tactics for the presentation of evidence by the prosecutor the public prosecutor. Conclusions are formulated on the need to intensify the development of up-to-date recommendations on the tactics of presenting evidence of a charge in a judicial investigation in criminal cases on crimes certain types


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 142-145
Author(s):  
K. A. Talalaev

The author of the article uses historical and comparative legal research methods and studies the term criminal prosecution. The term criminal prosecution is compared with other similar concepts in the article. The author examines the historical process of formation of this concept. The author of the article will outline the content of the discussion about the term criminal prosecution. The modern definition of this term is not correct in the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. The author proposes a new definition of the term. Criminal prosecution is the procedural activity of the prosecution in order to expose a person of committing an act prohibited by the criminal law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document