scholarly journals The State of Law in the Application of Preventive Measures in the Form of Detention

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 85-91
Author(s):  
D. A. Galochkin
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Office Work ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Detention Centers ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Detention Facilities ◽  
Statistical Indicators

Based on the analysis of statistical indicators of Prosecutor's office work on supervision on implementation of laws by administrations of detentions, the main problems prevailing in detention centers and related with application of a preventive measure as a pre-trial detention against suspects and accused of committing crimes are given in the article. The analysis of the activity of the European court of human rights on consideration of Russian citizens claims about violations of the Federal law of 15.07.1995 No. 103-FZ "About incarceration of suspects and accused of committing crimes" is carried out, as well as measures taken by the Russian Federation to eliminate them. The causes of overcrowding in remand centers occurred in Moscow, Moscow region and a number of other regions are analyzed. The author made suggestions to improve current legislation. The article contains recommendations to prosecutors supervising the implementation of laws by administrations of pre-trial detention facilities, as well as the preliminary investigation of criminal cases.

scholarly journals Investigator’s covert-nature procedural activities

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 04011
Author(s):  
Marina Sergeevna Kolosovich ◽  
Lyudmila Vladimirovna Popova ◽  
Anna Fedorovna Zotova ◽  
Maria Mikhailovna Bondar ◽  
Olga Sergeevna Shamshina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Intelligence ◽  
The Russian Federation

Over the years, most of the Russian processualists denied the investigator’s right to engage in actions of covert nature and deemed it impossible to integrate the norms of criminal intelligence legislation in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation adopted on 18.12.2001 No. 174-FZ, rightly referring to the impossibility to vest a single duty-bearer engaged in a preliminary investigation with unprecedented powers. Meanwhile, the latest decades have been marked by active legislative activity in many countries, which in fact has turned covert criminal intelligence and surveillance into a procedural activity. These innovations became specific of a number of countries regardless of their legal system belonging to the Romano-Germanic or Anglo-Saxon legal system, testifying to more profound roots of the problem. The study is also relevant in terms of dissatisfaction, expressed by the Russian law-enforcement authorities, with the crime solvency rate and with the interaction of criminal intelligence detectives and internal affairs investigators. The goal of the study is to identify the procedural provisions governing the investigator’s covert-nature activities and related law enforcement problems. The methodological framework of the research comprises general and particular methods of scientific knowledge: dialectical, systemic, deductive, inductive; synthesis, analysis; comparative legal analysis, statistical and other methods. Results and novelty: it was concluded that the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for the regulation of the investigator’s confidential-nature activities inherent in covert criminal intelligence and surveillance and requiring more detailed elaboration, as concerns the issues of securing the rights of partakers of the said activity; the authors express doubt regarding the justification of the legislator’s differentiation of covert activities under criminal cases into covert investigative actions (Art. 185, 186, 186.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and covert operational and investigative operations that are in fact identical to the former (Art. 6, Cl. 9-11 of the Russian Federation Federal Law No. 144-FZ as of 12.08.1995 “On criminal intelligence and surveillance”.

SOME FEATURES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN RUSSIA IN CONNECTION WITH THE SPREAD OF CORONAVIRUS INFECTION (COVID-19)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 149-154
Author(s):  
YURI FRANCIFOROV ◽  
◽  
MARINA BARANOVA
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Coronavirus Infection ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Judicial Actions ◽  
Emergency Measures

The purpose of the article is to consider the peculiarities of investigative and judicial actions that are caused by their postponement, the inability to attract a lawyer, as well as the suspension of the preliminary investigation during the period of emergency measures taken by the government of the Russian Federation in response to the outbreak of the coronavirus infection pandemic (COVID-19). The authorsanalyze the features of the courts activity in connection with the coronavirus pandemic, which is associated with minimizing the personal reception of citizens and submitting documents via electronic Internet reception offices of courts or by Russian Post, as well as the possibility of conducting online court sessions. The authors come to the conclusion that the judicial system was not sufficiently prepared for the pandemic, and therefore it is urgently necessary to adopt a special normative act that would regulate the implementation of judicial proceedings in emergency situations, allowing to continue to consider urgent cases, including materials on the election, extension, cancellation or change of a preventive measure.

Organization of pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases in Russia and abroad as a factor in ensuring access to justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 167-179
Author(s):  
T. Yu. Vilkova
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Cognitive Activity ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Online Service ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Right

The article shows the main models of building pre-trial proceedings in the Russian Federation and foreign countries, analyzes the provision of access to justice in each of the models. A number of measures have been proposed to build pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases that effectively ensure access to justice, including abandoning the stage of initiating a criminal case and keeping a countdown of the preliminary investigation from the moment of registration of a crime report, conducting pre-trial cognitive activity (investigation) under the guidance of a prosecutor, and bringing charges by the prosecutor.based on the results of the investigation, granting participants who are not vested with authority the right to apply to the court to deposit evidence and to assist the court in protecting their interests in connection with the refusal of the preliminary investigation body to satisfy motions related to the process of proving, the introduction of effective simplified and accelerated procedures in pre-trial proceedings, the establishment of digital interaction between government agencies and the population through a single secure digital online platform; creation of a mechanism for filing reports of crime through a special online service integrated into the specified digital platform.

Prosecutor in the Court of Cassation in Criminal Cases

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Лев Бертовский ◽  
Lyev Byertovskiy ◽  
Дина Гехова ◽  
Dina Gekhova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Moscow City ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

Federal Law No. 433-FZ «On Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Annulment of Certain Legislative Acts (Provisions of Legislative Acts) of the Russian Federation» entered into force since January 1, 2013 in relation to the powers of prosecutors to lodge cassation representations against court’s decisions is under review in the article. The authors analyse judicial practice of cassation instance in Moscow City Court of 2014 year on criminal cases and demonstrate some omissions of prosecutors in consideration of cases in the court of cassation. The conclusion shows that a cassation representation should be prepared and submitted by subordinate to higher prosecutor, provided that public prosecutor shall obtain the right to apply directly to that prosecutor who has the right to lodge a cassation representation along with the project thereof. Such novel will positively influence to the quality of cassation representations prepared and made by prosecutors.

scholarly journals Concept of Digital Evidence, Current Status and Its Role in the Evidentiary Process

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 55-60
Author(s):  
A. Yu. Cherdantsev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Digital Evidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Significant Information ◽  
Current State ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes the international current state of the concept of digital evidence, its meaning, types and role in the process of proving in criminal cases in the practical activities of the preliminary investigation bodies of the Russian Federation, considers some problems arising in law enforcement practice, suggests the author's classification of modern digital traces, studies and compares international practice governing the practical application of digital evidence, their concept and content. The problem of gaps in the legal regulation of digital evidence is considered, as well as the possibility of introducing amendments to the current legislation concerning the legal recognition of digital evidence along with traditional types of evidence, as well as the regulation of the use of digital evidence in criminal proceedings, and a proposal is made to introduce a number of amendments to the current legislation of the Russian Federation, where it is necessary to secure definitions of digital evidence, thus legalizing it, stating in the following re At the same time, it is noted that there is no need to introduce a separate article to regulate digital (electronic) evidences, because it is rather difficult to determine the volume of digital (electronic) evidences (digital criminally significant information), at least because there is no unanimity in this respect and there was no unanimity, besides, due to the dynamic development of electronics, including personal ones, this norm quickly lost its relevance and required amendments, creating a certain gap in legal regulation, which is more complicated.

scholarly journals A New System of Preventive Measures Alternative to Remand in Custody: First Results of Application, Development Prospects

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-255
Author(s):  
Lev Bertovskij ◽  
Aleksandr Kvyk
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Application Development ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
European Court ◽  
First Results

We currently witness a heightened interest for the humanization of penalization measures, specifically, preventive measures, both in the theory and practice of Russian criminal procedure. There is well-grounded criticism of the fact that the number of remands in custody used as preventive measures is high and that their terms are prolongated many times, and on similar grounds, both in the Russian criminal procedure sphere and in the European Court of Human Rights during the examination of specific complaints. The analyzed statistical information showed that in 2015, remand in custody as a preventive measure in the criminal cases of grave and especially grave crimes was used for every second suspect or accused. It could not but contribute to the development of a system of preventive measures alternative to detention, and to the emergence of its new types. The authors analyze changes in the strict hierarchical system of preventive measures in view of Federal Law № 72-ФЗ enacted on April 18, 2018, which changed the procedure of applying the preventing measures of house arrest and bail and provided a measure that is completely new for Russian criminal process - the prohibition of certain actions. A considerable variety of restrictive measures included in the prohibition of certain actions, and the possibility of applying them in combination with a bail created a situation paradoxical for Russian criminal process when the application of a measure of prohibition of certain actions, that is a milder one in the hierarchy of restrictive actions, may restrict the rights and liberties of a person to a greater degree than a bail, which is a stricter measure. Besides, the legislative definition of the essence of house arrest as complete isolation of a person from the society and the prohibition of certain actions as partial isolation has created a competition between these preventive measures when they are enforced in practice. The authors present convincing arguments to show that it is impossible to ensure complete isolation of a person form the society without placing that person in the pre-trial detention facility, which makes it possible to equal house arrest with a prohibition to leave a dwelling in a certain period within the framework of prohibiting certain actions. Although there are some questions regarding the application of preventive measures alternative to remand in custody, we should commend the efforts of lawmakers to develop a system of these measures, and the practice of their enforcement will certainly allow to eliminate the existing competition and solve specific problems of their selection and application.

scholarly journals PECULIARITIES OF SUPERVISION OVER THE RECEPTION, REGISTRATION AND AUTHORIZATION OF CRIMES UNDER ARTICLE 145.1 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION BY THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AUTHORITIES

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-540
Author(s):  
M.A. Gabdullina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Complete Failure ◽  
Employer Liability ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

The Constitution of the Russian Federation protects the right to work for remuneration not below the statutory minimum wage. Non-payment of wages is one of the most serious violations of worker's rights. In this regard, the current legislation provides for different types of employer liability for violating these provisions: civil, administrative and criminal. The Federal law “On amendments to article 145.1 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation” dated 23.12.2010 No. 382-FZ tightened criminal liability for non-payment of wages. Thus, in particular, this law introduced criminal liability for partial non-payment of wages, while the former wording of article 145.1 of the Criminal code established liability only for its complete failure. In practice, this norm has not previously been brought to criminal liability for partial non-payment of wages. The paper deals with the issues of powers of the Prosecutor at the stage of reception, registration and resolution of reports on crimes provided for by article 145.1 of the criminal code. The problematic issues arising from the investigative authorities in conducting procedural checks on the specified categories of messages are analyzed. Suggestions on the improvement of criminal-procedural legislation are made.

Features of the Court Session in Resolving Issues of Detentionas a Preventive Measure

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 73-78
Author(s):  
O. V. Kachalovа ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Factual Information ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The problem of the validity and duration of detention can be solved, inter alia, by strengthening the adversarial nature of the court»s decision on the application of this preventive measure. The purpose of the article is to determine the appropriate possibilities of research in court in the conditions of competition and equality of the parties of factual information and data submitted by the parties in order to resolve the issue of the possibility of the use of detention or extension of its terms. Based on the analysis of the norms of the criminal procedure law, the positions of the European Court of human rights, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, doctrinal sources, the use of formal logical, statistical and other methods, the author comes to the following conclusions. The burden of proof of the absence of grounds for detention cannot be placed on the accused. The need to study specific facts and materials that indicate the existence of the above conditions and grounds, determines the need for a specific judicial investigation on this issue. Research of the presented materials is carried out in court session with participation of the parties on the terms of competition. In this case, the court may not enter into a discussion on the guilt of a person, but only to establish the presence or absence of grounds and conditions for the detention of a person. If the prosecution party has not submitted the relevant materials for investigation in the court session, the court may not grant the investigator's request for detention or extension of its terms. The request of the defence for the examination of witnesses, whose testimony can have a significant impact on the resolution of the question of the presence or absence of the grounds and conditions for detention must be satisfied by the court in case they are grounded, motivated and are of direct relevance to the issue under consideration.

Bail as a Preventive Measure: Some Problems and Ways to Improve Effectiveness

2021 ◽  
pp. 62-65
Author(s):  
Aleksey I. Tsyretorov ◽  
◽  
Andrey G. Anisimov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
Significant Problem ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
State Revenue ◽  
Justice Restoration

The bail serves to reduce the likelihood of the situation when the suspect or the accused flees from inquiry, preliminary investigation or trial, continues the criminal activity; threatens a witness and (or) other participants in criminal proceedings, destroys evidence, or otherwise obstructs a criminal case proceedings. Drawing on the structure of crimes committed in Russia, with more than half being property crimes such as theft and fraud, choosing bail as a preventive measure, if possible, seems to be a logical and apparently popular measure due to several circumstances. Most of the mercenary crimes are motivated by the illegal acquisition of property or money. Consequently, bail as a restraint measure affects the lucrative motivation of the suspect or the accused and is often adequate to the damage caused. A significant problem of social justice restoration in most criminal cases is the compensation for damage or harm, which in most cases is measured in monetary and property terms. In this case, the bail could become a real mechanism for compensation for such harm, because money or property in the case of bail is already available at the time of the trial and could be used to compensate for the harm caused. However, in reality, such compensation is not used. The conversion of bail to state revenue in case of violation by the accused or suspect of obligations related to the bail does not contribute to the solution of this problem.

scholarly journals On violation of the logic of the legal mechanism of bringing to justice for beatings and additional measures for their prevention

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (3) ◽  
pp. 178-185
Author(s):  
Aleksey Drozd ◽  
Aleksandr Ravnyushkin
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Mechanism

The relevance of the research is determined by a legal gap in the current legislation, which lies in the fact that when bringing a person who has committed a crime under Article 116.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation repeatedly in relation to the same person to responsibility, the state of the criminal record of this criminal is not taken into account. In this case, a person who has unexpunged or outstanding convictions, when committing battery for the third time, according to common sense, should be brought to criminal responsibility, and not to administrative responsibility, as is currently the case. In order to eliminate this conflict, the authors propose to include part 2 of Art. 1161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for the liability of a person who has an unexpunged or outstanding conviction in relation to the same person. At the same time, the authors consider it necessary to include a group of criminal cases considered as cases of public prosecution to part 2 of Art. 1161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The authors also see an urgent problem of the need to improve the effectiveness of the prevention of domestic violence through the inclusion of new legal means in legislation and law enforcement practice. Attempts to implement the norms of international acts providing for legal means of preventing domestic violence in the Russian Federation, as well as the study of foreign experience on this issue, according to the authors, looks ambiguous and is debatable. In particular, the issue of introducing protective orders and orders as administrative and legal means of preventing administrative offenses through the adoption of the federal law «On the Prevention of Domestic Violence in the Russian Federation» is being considered. According to the authors, taking into account the foreign practice, there are sufficient grounds to believe that protective prescriptions and some other means will not be able to confirm their effectiveness in Russia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document