scholarly journals Restrictions of individual’s rights, freedoms and legal interests within temporary access to items and documents: practical aspects.

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-284
Author(s):  
Andriy Melnychenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Informed Decisions ◽  
Legitimate Interests

Temporary access to things and a document as an institution that restricts human rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings and its main properties have been studied. Attention is drawn to the problem of numerous risks of human rights violations during the application of temporary access to things and documents due to unfounded and weak argumentation of investigators' requests for temporary access, as well as a superficial assessment of circumstances by the investigating judge due to overload of requests. Statistical data have been studied, which indicate the need for consistent reform of judicial control in the direction of studying the materials and making informed decisions. Temporary access to things and documents in the criminal process is part of the institution of measures to ensure criminal proceedings. It attracts the attention of scholars because it has a rather complicated procedure for obtaining a decision on temporary access to things and documents, which must be provided by the investigating judge based on the results of the petition. The mechanism of judicial control indicates that this measure to some extent restricts the rights, freedoms or legitimate interests of a person – a participant in criminal proceedings or a third party. Related to this is the problem of the measure under investigation, which is the risk of violation of the rights of individuals, because every year the investigating judges receive a large number of requests for temporary access, and there are specific features in terms of providing temporary access to things and documents containing legally protected secret.

Judicial Control and Prosecutorial Supervision in the System of Guarantees for Observing the Rights and Freedoms of a Suspect Person

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 792
Author(s):  
Talgat T. DYUSSEBAYEV ◽  
Aizhan A. AMANGELDY ◽  
Talgat T. BALASHOV ◽  
Ainur A. AKIMBAYEVA ◽  
Kuanysh ARATULY ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Cis Countries ◽  
Special Studies

In the process of reforming the criminal procedure legislation, the institution of the prosecutor’s office has become one of its important aspects. The judiciary, being one of the independent and autonomous branches of power in criminal proceedings, which is a system of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens, is by far the most effective structure for protecting human rights. The article reveals the essence of judicial control and prosecutorial supervision, identifies a number of problems in the form of potential threats to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of a suspect (accused) in this form of preliminary investigation. As a result of the study, the following was stated. The current provisions of the CIS constitutions regulating the sphere of human rights and freedoms have made it possible to single out separate independent areas in the activities of the prosecutor’s office. Based on the practical problems that arise in the conditions of the new Criminal Procedure Code in the CIS countries, the authors consider it reasonable that the current oversight functions assigned to the prosecution authorities in ensuring the rights and freedoms of a suspect and an accused during the investigation, necessitate further special studies with the aim of development of evidence-based proposals for their resolution.  

scholarly journals Standards for ensuring the legality of implementing unspount activities in criminal process through the prism of legal positions of the European court of human rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 111-123
Author(s):  
A. Tumanyants ◽  
I. Krytska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Democratic Society ◽  
Order Conditions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Covert Activity

The analysis of the legal positions of the ECHR in the aspect of the subject of the article under consideration made it possible to conditionally single out the following standards for ensuring the legality of the implementation of covert activity in criminal proceedings:- predictability. Its essence lies in the fact that the grounds, procedural order, conditions, timing, the circle of persons and crimes in relation to which it is allowed to carry out covert activities should be as detailed, clear and accurate as possible in the criminal procedural legislation. Moreover, any person had the opportunity to familiarize himself with the relevant regulatory prescriptions and foresee the actions that can be carried out in relation to him;- warranty against abuse. The content of this standard can be disclosed by more detailed highlighting of clarifying provisions ("substandards"). These include: control of interference in human rights and freedoms; the certainty of the circle of persons in relation to whom it is possible to carry out secret activities; limited corpus delicti, for the purpose of investigation or prevention of which covert activity is allowed;; the existence in national legislation of procedures that facilitate the law of the implementation of covert activity in criminal proceedings; the temporary nature of the implementation of secret activities in the criminal process;- verifiability. The essence of this standard can be disclosed through the establishment of judicial control over the decision of the issue regarding the possible destruction of information obtained in the course of conducting covert activities, which is not relevant to criminal proceedings, as well as the requirement for the mandatory opening of decisions that were the basis for conducting covert investigative actions;- exclusivity. The main content of this standard is that covert activity in criminal proceedings can be carried out only in cases where the disclosure or prevention of a crime in another way is impossible or is too complicated;- proportionality of the intervention and its expediency. The essence of this standard is that the implementation of certain covert coercive actions that are associated with the restriction of human rights and freedoms must be proportionate to the goals for which such actions are directed. Moreover, these goals and the applied coercion must be necessary in a democratic society;- inadmissibility of tacit interference in the communication of some subjects. First of all, this requirement concerns the need to legislatively guarantee non-interference in communication between a lawyer and his client, a priest and an accused, etc., which means a ban on targeted control over the communication of certain subjects, as well as the obligation to destroy information obtained in the course of an accidental, situational interfering with their communication.

SPECIFIC FEATURES OF PROPERTY INTERESTS PROTECTION OF THE PENAL SYSTEM OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AS REPRESENTATIVE OF A VICTIM

2021 ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
Дмитрий Викторович Кияйкин
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Penal System ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment

В статье проведен анализ существующей практики защиты имущественных интересов уголовно-исполнительной системы Российской Федерации при участии в уголовном процессе в качестве представителя потерпевшего, изложены рекомендации по улучшению данной работы с учетом особенностей сложившейся практики. Раскрываются особенности уголовно-процессуальной защиты на основе материалов территориальных органов и анализа дел указанной категории схарактеристикой эффективных решений иимеющихся проблем по защите имущественных интересов уголовно-исполнительной системы (далее - УИС), материалов практики защиты поуказанным вопросам, аналитических и статистических данных за 2018-2020 гг. Обращено внимание, чтона практике имеются сложности с определением размера возмещаемого ущерба и сроков исковой давности, а также с фактическим исполнением судебных решений овзыскании ущерба в связи с финансовой несостоятельностью должников. Важной проблемой по защите имущественных интересов остается отсутствие методики определения размера причиненного репутационного вреда органам иучреждениям уголовно-исполнительной системы Российской Федерации. Обеспечение своевременного допуска представителя органа илиучреждения УИС имеет существенное значение для защиты имущественных интересов, поскольку юридическое лицо получает фактическую возможность по отстаиванию своих законных интересов лишь смомента допуска представителя - физического лица. Автором определены направления работы должностных и иных заинтересованных лиц по реализации защиты имущественных интересов УИС при участии в уголовном процессе в качестве представителя потерпевшего. The article analyzes the existing practice of protecting the property interests of the Penal system of the Russian Federation when participating in criminal proceedings as a representative of the victim, and provides recommendations for improving this work, taking into account the features of the current practice. The article reveals the features of criminal procedure protection based on the materials of territorial bodies and the analysis of cases of this category with the characteristics of effective solutions and existing problems in protecting the property interests of the Penal system (hereinafter the FPS), materials of defense practice on these issues, analytical and statistical data for the period 2018-2020. Attention is drawn to the fact that in practice there are some peculiarities in determining the amount of damage to be compensated and the limitation period. Due to the financial insolvency of debtors in practice, there is a difficulty with the actual execution of court decisions on recovery of damages. An important problem in protecting property interests remains the lack of a methodology for determining the amount of reputational damage caused to the bodies and institutions of the Russian Federation's penal system. Ensuring the timely admission of a representative of a body or institution of a penal system is essential for the protection of property interests, since a legal entity gets the actual opportunity to defend its legitimate interests only from the moment of admission of a representative - an individual. The author defines the directions of work of officials and other interested persons to protect the property interests of the Penal system of the Russian Federation when participating in criminal proceedings as a representative of the victim.

scholarly journals Standard of proof «sufficient reason» in the criminal procedure of Ukraine

2019 ◽  
pp. 31-42
Author(s):  
M. Pohoretskiy ◽  
O. Mitskan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Sufficient Reason ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
Reasonable Suspicion ◽  
Procedural Decisions

Based on the results of analysis of foreign doctrine, foreign procedural legislation, foreign law enforcement practice, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. In the article explores problematic issues of the application of the standard of proof “sufficient reason” in the domestic criminal process. The relevance of the article is that the standard of proof “sufficient reason” or “probable cause” in the system of standard of proof in the domestic criminal process has a special place and using to accept most procedural decisions at the pre-trial investigation. The purpose of the article is to substantiation the main direction of using in the criminal proceed of Ukraine standard of proof “sufficient reason” taking into account the legal nature of this standard. In the article proved that “sufficient reason” is the standard of proof in the criminal proceed of Ukraine execution of which is based on “common sense” and in the factual analysis (assessment) of the whole set of facts and circumstance in their integrity, authorized entities with the use of special knowledges and experience on establishing “sufficient reason” for making appropriate procedural decision. Implementation of the standard of proof “sufficient reason” as well as “reasonable suspicion” doesn`t envisage a lack of doubt as guilty of the person. Sufficient is a possible knowledge about committing criminal offence by person with the difference that for the highest standard measures have to be higher. Moreover, within “flexible” standard of proof “sufficient reason” of the level of probability can also vary, depending on how much negatively appropriate procedural decision will affect the rights of the person. Prove that in the current Criminal procedural code of Ukraine the standard of proof “sufficient reason” is used to accept most procedural decisions at the pre-trial investigation stage in criminal proceedings, when the most reasonable suspicion of a committing person criminal offence is insufficient due to significant restrictions on human rights as a result of appropriate decision. At that, the flexible nature of the standard of evidence "sufficient reason", which consists in the required measure conviction the appropriate standard from the circumstances of the specific criminal proceedings, allows you to assert its suitability for Making a wide range of procedural decisions. Standard of proof “sufficient reason” is used for adoption of such procedural decisions: on the application of certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings; in addressing the issue of applying precautionary measures as a variety of measures to ensure criminal proceedings; in addressing the issue of individual investigative (detective) actions; in addressing the issue of granting permission for secret investigative (detective) actions and deciding on the use of the results of unspoken investigative actions in other criminal proceedings; when deciding on the placement of the person in the receiver-allocator for children (Part 4 art. 499 of the Criminal procedural code of Ukraine).

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.

Admissibility of Evidence Obtained by Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment. Does the European Court of Human Rights Offer a Coherent and Convincing Approach?

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-153
Author(s):  
Wojciech Jasiński
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
European Court ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Main Shortcoming

Abstract The paper presents and assesses the approach of the ECtHR to admissibility of evidence obtained through torture and inhuman or degrading treatment in the criminal process. The author examines the content of the standard, its justifications and the consistency of the ECtHR's reasoning. The paper refers both to the admissibility of statements and real evidence as well as to primary and derivate evidence obtained in violation of Article 3 echr. The admissibility of evidence obtained by oppressive conduct of private individuals is also analysed. The assessment of the Strasbourg Court’s case law indicates that its approach is quite nuanced and, unfortunately, inconsistent and incoherent. Its main shortcoming is the lack of an in-depth analysis of the rationale for the inadmissibility of evidence obtained by maltreatment and the piecemeal treatment of individual categories of such evidence devoid of attempt to comprehensively address its admissibility in criminal proceedings.

REVIEW ON THE MONOGRAPH OF OLEKSANDR TORBAS �DISCRETION IN THE CRIMINAL PROCESS OF UKRAINE: THEORETICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PRACTICE OF IMPLEMENTATION�

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 147-150
Author(s):  
Iryna Hloviuk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Theoretical Justification ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Current Period ◽  
Legitimate Interests

Current period of development of the legal system of Ukraine is characterized by variability of legislation that regulates, in particular, organization of judicial system and implementation of criminal proceedings. Unfortunately, criminal procedure legislation is no exception, given how many changes and additions have been made to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine since its entry into force in 2020. Undoubtedly, like any other codified legal act, CPC of Ukraine in modern conditions cannot be unchanged, given the dynamics of public relations, the provisions of international law, decisions of ECtHR and number of attempts to solve identified problems of its application. Difficulties of criminal procedural law enforcement are manifested in such an area as the use of discretion of authorities in criminal proceedings, although without it application of legislation is ineffective. At the same time, lawful discretion in criminal proceedings should not turn into its opposite � arbitrariness, which will already violate rights and legitimate interests of individuals and legal entities. In criminal proceedings, given the imperative method of legal regulation and possibility of various coercive measures, including those related to the restriction of constitutional human rights, this issue is of particular importance, given, inter alia, that prosecution�s discretion applies within non-adversarial procedure, and the CPC of Ukraine does not always provide for the possibility of appealing such decisions in court. The peer-reviewed monograph consists of four chapters, which contain 10 sections. Structuring of the monograph is logical; the author analyse problems of discretion from questions of concept, signs and limits of discretion, and then moves to the characteristic of realization of discretion by judge, prosecutor, investigator, detective. In general, without a doubt, the monograph of Torbas O. O. �Discretion in the criminal process of Ukraine: theoretical justification and practice of implementation� is relevant, complete and fundamental scientific work, has scientific and practical value. Monograph of Torbas O.O. significantly enriches criminal procedure doctrine regarding the subjects of criminal proceedings, criminal procedure decisions and other areas.

Beyond UN Accountability for Human Rights Violations

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-104
Author(s):  
Frédéric Mégret
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
State Dependency ◽  
Host State ◽  
The United Nations

The overarching focus on the United Nations and its agents for human rights violations and abuses they may have committed, as well as the attention to troop contributing states and even ‘victims’, has broadly shifted attention away from the role of the host state in peace operation. This article seeks to unpack that omission and suggests that it is far more problematic than commonly thought, in particular because it tends to reproduce some of the problematic features of the political economy of peacekeeping that are the background of rights abuses in the first place. Instead, as part of a tradition of thinking of human rights in terms of sovereign protection, the article makes the case for taking much more seriously the role that the host state can and should have in order to address abuses by international organizations. It emphasises how international legal discourse has tended to ‘give up’ on the host state, but also how host states have themselves been problematically quiescent about violations occurring on their territory. This has forced victims to take the improbable route of seeking to hold the UN accountable directly, bereft of the sort of legal and political mediation which one would normally expect their sovereign to provide. The article contributes some thoughts as to why host states have not taken up their citizens’ cause more forcefully with the United Nations, including governmental weakness, a domestic culture of rights neglect, but also host state dependency on peace operations. The article then suggests some leads to rethink the role of the host state in such circumstances. It points out relevant avenues under international law as well as specifically under international human rights law, drawing on the literature developed to theorise the responsibilities of states in relation to private third-party non-state actors within their jurisdiction. It argues that there is no reason why the arguments developed with private actors, notably corporations, in mind could not be applied to public actors such as the UN. Finally, the article suggests some concrete ways in which the host state could more vigorously take up the cause of rights abuses against international organizations including by requiring the setting up of standing claims commissions or making more use of its consent to peace operations, as well as ways in which it could be forced to do so through domestic law recourses. The article concludes by suggesting that reinstating the host state within what should be its natural prerogatives will not only be a better way of dealing with UN abuses, but also more conducive to the goals of peacekeeping and state construction.

scholarly journals Protection of Human Rights in the Criminal Procedure Legislation of the Republic Of Uzbekistan and Improved Reforms Taking Into Account Foreign Experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 1102-1115
Author(s):  
Botirjon Khayitbayevich Ruzmetov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Theory Of Evidence ◽  
The Right

In this article author had searched the questions devoted the protection of human rights in the criminal procedure legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan and comparing with the legislation and worldwide experience of the foreign states.The article reveals the ongoing liberalization of the criminal law policy in the Republic of Uzbekistan, which is aimed at expanding human and fair norms, strengthening the protection of the rights, legitimate interests of a person andsociety. Against this background, the significance of investigative actions and the theory of evidence in the country's criminal procedural legislation is being revised. The development of science and technology leads to the improvement of methods of committing crimes using computer technology, taking into account which the timely disclosure and effective investigation of socially dangerous acts requires extensive use of mathematical tools and computer technologies.In this regard, changes are taking place in the investigative practice aimed at increasing knowledge in the field of computer technologies among law enforcement officials and increasing the responsibility of the personal of the investigative and judicial authorities in the implementation of their activities.The author emphasizes that despite significant restrictions on the rights and legitimate interests of a person in the conduct of investigative actions, all of them are necessary for obtaining sufficient evidence to expose the guilt of the offender, in the manner prescribed by law.Compliance by investigators, prosecutors and judges of all criminal procedural requirements established by the legislation of the country is a key requirement for the recognition of evidence as lawful and sufficient for a fair sentence.It should be noted that the article highlights that, since 1994, the Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan enshrines the right to defense by involving a lawyer in the case from the moment a person is detained on suspicion of committing a crime, as well as the principle of equality of arms in criminal proceedings. An addition to the liberalization of legislation is the fact that now the courts are freed from such unusual functions as the execution of court decisions.In addition, the article expands on the author's proposals for improving the legislation of Uzbekistan, as well as expanding the power of lawyers, especially in the conduct of investigative actions, aimed at expanding the process of liberalization of criminal law in the country and improving the situation with the protection of human rights in the investigation of criminal cases.

scholarly journals Access to Justice in Ukrainian Criminal Proceedings During the COVID-19 Outbreak

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 115-133
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Democratic Development ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Judicial Protection

This article examines relevant issues of criminal proceedings in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ukraine. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments have focused their efforts on protecting democratic values and ensuring not only the rights and legitimate interests of their people, but also their lives and health. At the same time, the pandemic has affected not only the economies of countries, but also their democratic development and fundamental rights, which have always been a priority of any democratic society. Courts and law enforcement authorities have faced challenges that have been and still are adequately addressed in order to ensure that the rights and legitimate interests of those seeking judicial protection are respected. Each state independently assessed the degree of risks and the extent of permissible restrictions on the rights and freedoms of persons involved in the proceedings, so the present study analyses the different approaches that have been applied. At the same time, documents of the Council of Europe for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) have gained high importance, because they, among others, have developed tools for Council of Europe member states to address the problems of ensuring access to justice in the pandemic. The generalization and widespread discussion of such experiences is important, because it will be useful for states to further improve existing legislation, taking into account best practices. Based on a study of changes introduced in the Ukrainian legislation to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease, conclusions are proposed about the nature and extent of the restrictions, as well as the principles on which they should be based and the guarantees to be provided. Recommendations that will contribute to improving the regulation of access to justice in criminal matters in a pandemic are also proposed. Key words: justice in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; access to justice in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; judicial control over the protection of rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of persons in criminal proceedings; the investigating judge; reasonable terms of criminal proceedings; publicity and openness of court proceedings; trial by videoconference.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document