scholarly journals Appropriate subject of obtaining evidence of a criminal offense in the opinion of the court

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 224-228
Author(s):  
A.-M.Y. Anheleniuk
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Evidence Collection ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Operational Unit

The article considers the collection of evidence by the prosecution, because it is in this order that the evidence base of criminal proceedings is most often formed. Thus, the prosecutor, investigator (investigator) acting under Articles 36, 40, 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, as well as an employee of the operational unit pursuant to Article 41 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine on behalf of the investigator or prosecutor have the right to collect evidence. The purpose of the article is to study the affiliation of the subjects of evidence collection as part of the procedural form of the criminal process of Ukraine, taking into account the analysis of court decisions, namely the assessment of the evidence base as a basis for deciding on the merits of criminal proceedings. Cases of involvement of an improper subject in the pre-trial investigation, which are common and typical, are systematized. There are two types of improper subjects within the investigative (search) or procedural actions, namely the subject: 1) is not appointed in the manner prescribed by law, although according to current legislation according to the list of its powers may be appropriate; 2) does not have the authority under the law to make a specific decision or to conduct investigative (search) or procedural actions. An analysis of court decisions according to which courts provide an assessment of the procedural activities of the subjects of evidence collection in criminal proceedings at the stage of pre-trial investigation, including their relevance and admissibility. Thus, attention is paid to the assessment of courts on the legality of the presence of persons during investigative (investigative) or procedural actions; the correctness of fixing such a presence. In addition, the situations of appointment of relevant subjects in criminal proceedings to fulfill their powers are considered. It is proposed to supplement the first part of Article 236 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine with a provision that clarifies the grounds for the stay and authority of the employee of the operational and investigative service during the search.

scholarly journals 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

2021 ◽  
pp. 58-69
Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Soviet Space ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

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).

Provision of the access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-48
Author(s):  
Tatiana Topilina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Time Constraint ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access ◽  
Court Hearing

This article analyzes the problems of exercising the right of access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation. The author examines the legislation of post-Soviet countries in terms of provision the access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation. The subject of this research is the norms of Russian and foreign legislation that regulate to right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object of this research is the legal relations that emerge in implementation of the right of access to justice. It its demonstrated that the restriction on access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation instance is the time constraint for filing cassation appeal for the convict; and for consideration of interlocutory court decisions – the procedure for assessing cassation appeal without holding a court hearing. The conclusion is substantiated on the need to waive the time constraint for filing cassation appeal for the convict against final court decisions that have entered into force, and for consideration of interim court decisions, the procedure for assessing cassation appeal against the interlocutory court decision should be eliminated without holding a court hearing.

scholarly journals Investigation of Procedural Decisions at the Beginning of Pre-Trial Investigation

2020 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 262-271
Author(s):  
Yа. A. Burlaka
Keyword(s):  
Professional Competence ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Decisions

The author of the article studies one of the most important current topics from the point of view of practice – the decision of investigators to initiate a pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings. It is emphasized that all further movement of criminal proceedings depends on the timeliness of the investigator’s decision to conduct a pre-trial investigation. Moreover, it is of great importance for the effective achievement of such a task of criminal proceedings as the speed and completeness of the investigation. It is determined that the guarantee of non-entry of information about a criminal offense in the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations is the right of the applicant to appeal against decisions, actions or omission of the investigator, prosecutor. At the same time, the absence of a legal requirement to make a procedural decision to initiate or to refuse a pre-trial investigation, in particular in the form of a ruling, does not always contribute to the exercise of the applicant’s right to appeal. It is confirmed by the relevant court decisions, which, unfortunately, currently takes place in practice. Based on the results of the study, possible ways to improve the current criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine on this issue are proposed. The author has determined that the adoption of a procedural decision is impossible without a mandatory component of such a mechanism as the subject endowed with the relevant powers, and the quality of the decision itself directly depends on professional competence. The investigator, being authorized to conduct criminal proceedings, is an official who exercises state power through the adoption of procedural decisions, which affects the further direction of criminal proceedings. It is emphasized that the content of the procedural decision of the investigator, in a broad sense, is a product of mental activity, which forms the basis for the tasks of criminal proceedings. It is concluded that the investigator’s decision in the form of a reasoned decision to initiate or to refuse a pre-trial investigation is quite logical. It is explained by the fact that, first of all, the decision is an official written response to the appeal. It is established that early receipt of the decision is a guarantee of the right to appeal against decisions, actions or omission of the pre-trial investigation agencies.

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".

scholarly journals PROSECUTOR'S SUPERVISION OF LAW CONDUCTING INVESTIGATIVE (SEARCH) ACTIONS

2020 ◽  
pp. 377-386
Author(s):  
Я. Ю. Конюшенко
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Law ◽  
Procedural Guidance ◽  
Compliance With The Law ◽  
The Relationship

The purpose of the article is to define the prosecutor's supervision over investigative (search) actions as a legal guarantee of human rights, as well as problematic issues in its implementation and to make proposals to improve the current criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine. The article defines doctrinal approaches to the concepts of "prosecutor's supervision over compliance with the law during the pre-trial investigation" and "prosecutor's procedural guidance of the pre-trial investigation" in the context of investigative (search) actions. The author came to the conclusion that the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine "On the Prosecutor's Office" and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in terms of regulating the functions and powers of the prosecutor during the pre-trial investigation. Based on the study, it is proposed to consider procedural guidance as one of the forms of prosecutor's supervision over the pre-trial investigation, which is implemented directly by the prosecutor or a group of prosecutors who are appointed to carry it out in a particular criminal proceeding. The author also emphasizes the existence of forms of supervision of the highest level prosecutor on the legality of these actions, which are implemented through the demand and study of information on the progress and results of pre-trial investigation, criminal proceedings and certified copies of court decisions and study of compliance with criminal procedure. A number of problematic issues during the prosecutor's supervision in pre-trial criminal proceedings are outlined, which relate to the relationship between the prosecutor's supervision and judicial control over the legality of investigative (search) actions; subjects and subject of supervision of the prosecutor in this sphere; providing the prosecutor-procedural manager and prosecutors of the highest level with instructions and instructions during the investigative (search) actions. To address these issues, it is proposed to amend the current criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine. The study of the materials of criminal proceedings and the survey of the subjects of criminal proceedings indicate the existence of a number of problematic issues that exist during the implementation of the prosecutor's procedural guidance of investigative (search) actions in the context of human rights.

scholarly journals Right of the detainee to have contact with a lawyer or solicitor and to direct consultation with them as an element of the Right of Defence

2021 ◽  
Vol 57 ◽  
pp. 71-83
Author(s):  
Justyna Żylińska
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Real ◽  
Legal Advice ◽  
Real Contact ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Consequences

The subject of this study is an analysis of the detainee’s right to have contact with a lawyer or solicitor and to direct consultation with them as an element of the right of defence. The right of defence is also applicable with respect to detainees. An important element in the process of its fulfi lment is the real contact of the detainee with a lawyer or solicitor. In particular, it allows the detainee to obtain legal advice, not only with respect to the current procedural situation but also with respect to further legal consequences and ultimately effect the rights of defence to which the detainee is eligible in the manner consistent with his/her actual procedural interests. The author’s intention is to examine the scope and rules of application of the rights of the detainee as set out in Art. 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the analysis of its effect on the detainee’s effective exercising of the right of defence.

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.

Extradition of a Person: The National Law of Ukraine and the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatiana H. Fomina ◽  
Volodymyr I. Galagan ◽  
Zhаnnа V. Udovenko ◽  
Serhii Ye. Ablamskyi ◽  
Yana Yu. Koniushenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
European Court ◽  
Relevant Case ◽  
The Right

This article aims at establishing and emulating the relevant issues surrounding the detention of person presumed of committing a criminal offense outside the territory of Ukraine in respect with the provisions adumbrated by the European Court of Human Rights. The study was conducted through the prism of national legislation and the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The issues of realization of the detainee's rights, including the right to protection, were considered separately. According to the results of the study, certain ways to improve the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine have been formulated.

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.

scholarly journals ДЕЯКІ ПРОБЛЕМИ ТИМЧАСОВОГО ВИЛУЧЕННЯ ТА АРЕШТУ МАЙНА ЯК ЗАХОДІВ ЗАБЕЗПЕЧЕННЯ КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОВАДЖЕННЯ

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 520-528
Author(s):  
І. В. Гловюк
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

Стаття присвячена дослідженню проблемних питань застосування тимчасового вилу­чення майна та арешту майна як заходів забезпечення кримінального провадження із урахуванням наявної судової практики. Указано та обґрунтовано некоректність норма­тивного визначення тимчасового вилучення майна. Відмічено прогальність нормативного визначення арешту майна в аспекті об'єктів, на які може бути накладено арешт. Сфор­мульовано пропозиції щодо внесення змін та доповнень до ч. 1 ст. 167 КПК щодо ви­значення поняття «тимчасове вилучення майна» та ч. 1 ст. 170 КПК щодо осіб, на майно яких може бути накладено арешт.   The article is dedicated to the research of problematic issues of exercise of temporary seizure of property and arrest of property as means for ensuring criminal proceedings considering relevant judicial practices. Author mentioned and justified his point of view regarding incorrectness of the normative definition of seizure. Author also indicated whitespaces of the regulatory definition of arrest of property in the aspect of objects that may be the subject for the arrest. Proposals for amendments and additions to the part 1 of the Art. 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the definition of «temporary seizure of property» and part 1 of the Art. 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the scope of persons whose property may be arrested have been made.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document