scholarly journals CERTAIN PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF THE BEGINNING OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

Author(s):  
Dmуtrо Pylypenko ◽  

The article analyzes the features of the beginning of criminal proceedings defined by the current criminal procedure law of Ukraine. The criminal procedural norms which define an initial stage in criminal proceedings are investigated. The provisions of the norms of the legislation which determine the legal fact of the beginning of proceedings in the case are analyzed. The positions of scientists in this regard are considered. In particular, the scientific concepts concerning the implementation in the norms of the current law of the provision that existed in the content of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1960, namely the decision to initiate a criminal case. The analysis of the practice of application of the current norms of the criminal procedural law in this regard for the author's point of view on the expediency of such a step is analyzed. The author's position on the preservation of the existing law within the existing provisions, on the commencement of criminal proceedings from the moment of entering information into the unified register of pre-trial investigations. This position is fully correlated with the provisions of the concept of criminal justice reform. There are also examples from the practical activities of law enforcement agencies, which were the basis for this conclusion. The article also examines the issue of determining the time limits for the start of pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings and entering information into a single register of pre-trial investigations. The positions of scientists on this issue, which are quite different and sometimes polar, are analyzed. The author's attention is focused on certain difficulties that arise in law enforcement agencies during the proper initiation of criminal proceedings. It is emphasized that the term available in the current law for twenty-four hours is extremely insignificant for the correct determination of the qualification of the offense and its composition. It is proposed to increase the period to three days during which the investigator must enter information into the unified register of pre-trial investigations and initiate criminal proceedings. It is these time limits that must be sufficient for the investigator or prosecutor to properly comply with the requirements of the applicable criminal procedure law.

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 70-79
Author(s):  
Yu. G. Torbin ◽  
A. A. Usachev ◽  
L. P. Plesneva

Despite the prolonged use of certain forms of interaction between the investigator and investigative agencies at the initial stage of pre-trial proceedings, the criminal procedure legislation still lacks some aspects of their implementation. This makes it necessary to study the current situation and substantiate the theoretical and practical provisions concerning interaction between an investigator and investigative agencies in the context of verification of the report of the crime in the light of the planned digitalization of domestic criminal proceedings. The author suggests that the forms of interaction, the application of which is expedient at the initial stage of pre-trial proceedings, include two procedural forms (giving written instructions to an investigative agency about carrying out operational search activities, obtaining explanations, obtaining assistance in carrying out investigative and other procedural actions) and two organizational forms (joint planning and formation of an investigative and task force). In order to increase the efficiency of criminal procedure at the initial stage of pre-trial proceedings, to ensure clarity of the language of criminal procedure law and its compliance with law enforcement, the auther proposes to amend Part 1 of Article 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by supplementing it with the right of authorized officials and bodies to give to investigative agencies mandatory written instructions for obtaining explanations, and to receive assistance from the investigative agency in carrying out verification actions. At the same time, the paper demonstrates the author’s approch to excluding obtaining explanations from the general list of procedural actions specified in Part 1 of Article 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and conducted by authorized subjects of verification of the report of the crime. Also, the paper analyzes the importance of introduction of electronic document circulation into criminal proceedings from the point of view of efficiency of interaction between the investigator and investigative authorities at the initial stage of pre-trial investigation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 621-642
Author(s):  
Sergey B. Rossinskiy ◽  

The article is devoted to the analysis of historical prerequisites that predetermined the distinctive nature of the national system of Russian pre-trial proceedings as the initial stage of criminal procedure. By analyzing the peculiarities of domestic criminal procedure legislation, and the development of judicial and law enforcement agencies, in addition to drawing comparative parallels with foreign mechanisms for solving and investigating crimes, the author assumes that the gradual autonomy of the Soviet and then Russian system of pre-trial proceedings was a direct result of the well-known historical cataclysms associated with the Soviet power establishment in 1917 and its fall in 1991. It is noted that a rather unique model, based on the chaotic mixing and interweaving of various, including poorly compatible, elements inherent in various models of criminal procedure (French, German, Anglo-Saxon) of pre-trial proceedings has been formed in Russia at present. These elements are linked by means of specific domestic criminal procedure doctrine’s “inventions”, which are reflected in the relevant provisions of criminal procedure law and practical recommendations for law enforcement practice. The modern Russian model of pre-trial proceedings is expressed in the integration of the functions of the “police” and “justice”, in providing law enforcement agencies criminal procedural powers of a forensic nature to collect full-fledged evidence for the upcoming court hearing. According to the author, this explains many doctrinal and legislative problems of Russian pre-trial proceedings, which for many years have had a negative impact on judicial and investigative practice (problems related to the initiation of criminal proceedings; problems of practice in proving the results of operational-search activities; problems related to the legal regulation of the detention of a suspect, etc.). The research concludes that the legislator should stop the law-creating “throwing”, the policy of a chaotic mixing of various elements inherent in different types of criminal proceedings, and, finally, choose one single model that is the most suitable for modern Russia with its laws and realities of development.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 82-89
Author(s):  
A. P. Bozhchenko ◽  
I. M. Nikitin

The article reviews the contradictions between the procedural law and an attorney’s professional duty to use an opinion of a knowledgeable person in the system of criminal procedure protection. The paper provides an analysis of the problems and difficulties arising in the implementation of this right in the criminal process leading to violation of the equality and adversarial principles: the optionality of the defense’s right to involve a specialist; the biased attitude of law enforcement agencies to the expert presented by the defense; the desire to diminish the probative value of the specialist’s conclusion and testimony; the absence of an obligation for an investigator and court in all cases to attach the expert’s opinion to the case. The author emphasizes how important it is for all the participants in the criminal process to understand the expert’s opinion and testimony’s independent evidentiary value. Proposals that contribute to the legal specificity and further development of the specialist institution within the framework of the fundamental principles of competition and equality of the parties are presented.


Author(s):  
V.V. Shpiliarevych

The article is dedicated to the study of security measures in criminal and criminal procedural law of Ukraine. Determined by the influence of integration and globalization processes, there is a tendency of convergence of various branches of law, including criminal and criminal procedural law. Therefore, the implementation of a modern effective policy in the field of crime prevention in Ukraine requires an improvement of existing preventive measures and development of new ones, both at the international and national levels. That is why, criminal and criminal procedure measures, namely security measures, play an important role in ensuring the protection of a person's interests against internal and external threats. In particular, criminal-law security measures should be understood as a variety of measures of criminal nature, provided by the Criminal Code of Ukraine, which appliedn to a person, which is in «dangerous state», on behalf of the state on by reasonable court decision, in order to prevent the re-committing of a socially dangerous act, which predicted by the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. From a criminal procedural point of view, security measures (measures to ensure the safety of participants in criminal proceedings) - is the implementation of legal, organizational, technical and other measures aimed to protect life, health, housing, property, honor and dignity of a person against unlawful attacks, in order to create the necessary conditions for the proper administration of justice. As a conclusion, the author states that the security measures existing in the criminal law of Ukraine differ from the security measures of criminal procedural character, by its nature, system, subjects to which such measures are applied, the purposes and aims of its application.


Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  

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".


2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-160
Author(s):  
Andrіy Shulha ◽  
◽  
Tetyana Khailova ◽  

The article deals with the problem of specialist’s participation in the scene examination, which is carried out before entering information into the Unified Register of the pre-trial investigations. The essence of the problem is that the current criminal procedural law of Ukraine recognizes the specialist’s participation only in the pre-trial investigation, the litigation and the proceedings in the case of the commission of an unlawful act under the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. Part 1 of Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine states that a specialist in criminal proceedings is a person who has special knowledge and skills and can provide advice and conclusions during the pre-trial investigation and trial on issues that require appropriate special knowledge and skills. In other cases, the specialist has no procedural status. In addition, Part 1 of Article 237 of the CPC of Ukraine «Examination» states that the examination is conducted to identify and record information on the circumstances of the offense commitment. It is an act provided by the law of Ukraine on criminal liability. However, there are the cases in the investigation, when a report is received, for example, about a person's death, other events with formal signs of the offense, which must first be checked for signs of a crime, and only then the act can be considered as offense. In this case, a specialist takes part in the scene examination. However, the current criminal procedure law in accordance with Part 1, Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine determines the legal status of a specialist only as the participant in criminal proceedings. The paragraph 10, part 1 of Article 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine defines the criminal proceedings as pre-trial investigation and court proceedings or procedural actions in the case of the commission of an unlawful act. Therefore, when the inspection of the scene is based on the uncertain status of the event (there is no clear information that the event contains signs of an offense), the specialist’s participation is not regulated by law. The authors propose to consider the specialists as «experienced persons» in cases mentioned above and to include their advices to the protocol of the scene examination, as the advices of other scene examination participants.


Author(s):  
Tatyana Plotnikova ◽  
Andrey Paramonov

In the current difficult conditions for the economy of our state, corruption crimes represent a higher level of danger. It is necessary to reform anti-corruption activities in order to increase its effectiveness. One of the radical measures in the field of anti-corruption will be the abolition of the presumption of innocence for corrupt illegal acts. The presumption of inno-cence is a fundamental and irremovable principle of criminal law, which is enshrined in article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. Violation of this principle is impossible for criminal proceedings, but modern circumstances require timely, prompt, and sometimes radical so-lutions. It is worth not to neglect the measures of “insuring” on the part of law enforcement agencies, since otherwise it will increase the share of cor-ruption crimes in law enforcement agencies. The content of paragraph 4 of article 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is man-datory even if the presumption of innocence for corruption crimes is can-celed: “A conviction cannot be based on assumptions”. At the same time, the principle of differentiation of punishment will be implemented by assigning the term of imprisonment from the minimum to the maximum, depending on the severity of the illegal act.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 96-105

Investigation of crimes against justice in Ukraine is among topical problems of miscarriage of justice. Hundreds of criminal cases are recorded as a crime in the Official Register in Ukraine but only a few have been brought to the court. In this article we try to approach this problem in three ways: from the point of view of criminal law, criminal procedure and criminalistic measures of counteraction to miscarriage of justice. Such an approach helps to demonstrate problems of investigator, prosecutor and judge at different stages of criminal proceeding. Special attention is paid to specific regulation of the issues of criminal proceedings against a certain category of persons, including judges. Mistakes of representatives of law enforcement bodies become visible as a result of analyzing of real criminal cases. Such an analysis is aimed to disclose the problem of counteraction to miscarriage of justice in Ukraine.


Yuridika ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Bastianto Nugroho

The trial of a criminal case is to find out whether a criminal offense has occurred in an event, therefore in the most important criminal proceedings the proceedings are proved. Evidence is a problem that plays a role in the examination process in court because with this proof is determined the fate of a defendant. The legal function in the State of Indonesia is to regulate the order of society in the life of the nation and the state, whereas the violation of the law itself is an event that must exist in every society and is impossible to be eliminated absolutely, because violation of law is an integral part of development More complex. One of the provisions governing how the law enforcement officers carry out the task in the field of repressive is the criminal procedure law which has the purpose of searching and approaching material truth, the complete truth of a criminal case by applying the provisions of criminal procedure law honestly darn precisely with The purpose of finding out who the perpetrator can be charged with is a violation of the law. 


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Ariananto Waluyo Adi

The law recognizes both litigation and non-litigation settlement mechanisms, but it is almost not explicitly regulated for non-litigation settlement in criminal cases. Non-litigation in criminal recognizes the concept of restorative justice for the public interest, which is different from the private realm in civil. The concept of restorative justice exists to rehabilitate the state of criminals so that they are accepted back into the community. The concept of restorative justice is manifested in the mediation mechanism in criminal law in the form of penal mediation, but penal mediation does not yet have a legal umbrella. The non-progressive normative application of the law results in the overcapacity of prisons/remand centres. Currently, the Draft Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter as RKUHAP) is being drafted, which does not yet regulate the application of non-litigation solutions. Later, it can be applied by law enforcement agencies so that problems such as overcapacity prisons are resolved and the creation of peaceful order in the community. This study aims to provide a view of the concept of penal mediation in criminal procedural law to serve as an aspiration for the consideration of the parties involved in the preparation of the substance of the RKUHAP. This paper uses a normative approach with technical analysis using hermeneutic analysis and interpretation methods.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document