ON THE POSSIBILITIES OF INTEGRATING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INTO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 220-227
Author(s):  
ELENA PAPYSHEVA ◽  

This article examines the possibilities of using machine-readable law technologies in criminal procedural legislation and criminal proceedings; the analysis of the Concept of development of technologies of machine-readable law is carried out in order to determine the possibility of applying its provisions in the context of criminal procedural law. According to the author, the development of the technology of machine-readable law sets the legislator the task of starting the process of adapting the norms of the criminal procedure law to their subsequent presentation in formal language. Legislative acts should be structured as much as possible, within the acts, norms are more clearly divided into certain categories and groups with the building of logical connections between them. The norms of legislative acts need to be formalized, their content should not have legal and linguistic uncertainties, normative conflicts and broad discretionary powers. The conclusion is made about the need for legal transformations, formalization of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, based on the principle of legal certainty. If the adaptation of legislation to machine-readable norms is the future in the development of science and the system of legal regulation of the state, then the use of digital technologies in criminal proceedings is a matter of the present. It seems that modern digital technologies are sufficiently developed to start developing an automated information system at the state level that meets the formal requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code, within the framework of which a preliminary investigation will be carried out. Moreover, we are talking not only about the «electronic criminal case» in its generally accepted understanding. The author proposes the creation of a comprehensive universal program that provides for the automated application of the ontology of machine-readable law (descriptions in the formal language of many objects in the field of law and the connections between them) in the investigation of criminal cases using the method of teaching artificial intelligence based on a large array of data (including data, constituting the empirical base of research, which was studied in the development of private methods for investigating certain types of crimes).

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 792
Author(s):  
Talgat T. DYUSSEBAYEV ◽  
Aizhan A. AMANGELDY ◽  
Talgat T. BALASHOV ◽  
Ainur A. AKIMBAYEVA ◽  
Kuanysh ARATULY ◽  
...  

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.  


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1(63)) ◽  
pp. 127-133
Author(s):  
Виктор Николаевич ГРИГОРЬЕВ

The purpose of Russian criminal proceedings, which is very important among the modern social and legal institutions, is nevertheless deficient in its legal and regulatory form. It is noted that in the modern situation, some formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings have come into conflict with the real social and legal reality. Purpose: to resolve contradictions between the formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings and the actual social and legal reality. Methods: the author uses the methods of dialectical and formal logic, comparison, description, observation, interviewing, experiment, analysis, interpretation. Results: a theoretical basis has been developed for the choice, in the event of a conflict between the formulations of the purpose of criminal proceedings and the actual social and legal situation, of whether to change the normative formulation of the purpose of criminal proceedings or whether to change the procedure itself. In choosing the subject of reform, preference is given to traditional Russian values. Modern trends in Russian criminal proceedings do not fully reflect the needs of civil society in the Russian Federation. It is more accurate to assume that this is the result of a system of departmental and bureaucratic measures to distribute influence and burden. From a humanitarian standpoint, it would be more correct to return the criminal justice system to a state where it will again reflect the lost purpose, in particular, protecting individuals from unlawful accusations. The first step should be to remove from law enforcement officials the obligation to be unilateral in the examination of evidence and to represent only one party – the accusation (Chapter 6 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), as well as to remove the normative prohibition for the preliminary investigation and inquiry bodies to gather evidence defending the accused (Part 2 article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).


Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya

The purpose of this study was an attempt to theoretically understand the subject of judicial consideration of complaints against decisions, actions (inaction) of officials carrying out criminal prosecution. The research was carried out on the basis of comparative legal, formal logical, empirical, statistical methods. Judicial statistics for the year 2020 have been provided, and legislation has been studied from a historical and contemporary perspective, taking into account the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. The problem is that, in practice, for about 20 years the courts have had difficulties in determining the subject of complaints, since neither in theory nor in practice a consensus has been developed on this issue. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation also does not contain a definition of the concept of «subject matter». The situation is aggravated by the presence of evaluative concepts in the text of the law, leading to a varied understanding of the subject of appeal by the courts, which leads to a violation of the constitutional rights of citizens at the pre-trial stages of criminal proceedings. In the article, taking into account the analysis of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, legislation and the opinion of scientists, a recommendation was made to amend the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation to specify the subject of consideration of complaints in accordance with Art. 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in order to eliminate existing contradictions in practice and increase the level of protection of individual rights in pre-trial proceedings.


2021 ◽  
pp. 3-8
Author(s):  
Danil A. Donika ◽  

The article deals with the problem of abuse of subjective right in criminal proceedings at the stage of preliminary investigation. Based on a comparative analysis and study of foreign scientific literature, conclusions are drawn about the state of the issue under study in Russian criminal proceedings. Attention is focused on the need to work out procedural response measures by providing the magistrates’ courts and courts in general with additional, normative legal opportunities in order to effectively exercise judicial control at the pre-trial stage of the investigation in cases of abuse of law on the part of participants in the process.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-200
Author(s):  
Natalia Kashtanova

The subject of paper deals with the legal nature of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property.Methodological basis of the article is based on general scientific dialectical methods of cognitionof objective reality of the legal processes and phenomena that allowed us to conduct anobjective assessment of the state of legislation and law enforcement practice in the proceduralaspects of the cancellation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings of Russia.The results and scope of it’s application. It is submitted that the cancellation of the seizureof the property (or the individual limit) is allowed only on the grounds and in the mannerprescribed by the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. However, the studyfound serious contradictions in the application of the relevant law. In particular, cases inwhich the question of exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory),imposed in the criminal case was resolved in a civil procedure that, in the opinion of theauthor of the publication, is extremely unacceptable.On the stated issues topics analyzes opinions of scientists who say that the dispute aboutthe release of impounded property may be allowed in civil proceedings, including pendingresolution of the criminal case on the merits. The author strongly disagrees with this positionand supports those experts who argue that the filing of a claim for exemption of propertyfrom arrest (exclusion from the inventory) the reviewed judicial act of imposing of arrestwithout recognition per se invalid. In this regard, the author cites the legal position ofthe constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, from which clearly follows that of theright of everyone to judicial protection does not imply the possibility of choice of the citizenat its discretion, techniques and procedures of judicial protection, since the features of suchjudicial protection is defined in specific Federal laws.The author analyzes and appreciates Kazakhstan's experience of legal regulation of the permissibilityof filing a civil claim for exemption of property from seizure imposed in criminalproceedings. The author notes that the new civil procedural legislation of the Republic ofKazakhstan, which came into force from 01 January 2016, clearly captures that considerationin the civil proceedings are not subject to claims for exemption of property from seizureby the criminal prosecution body.Conclusions. Necessity of amendment to article 422 of the Civil Procedure Code of Russia:this article should not apply to cases of application of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property. Among other things, the author proposed additionsto part 9 of article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.


Author(s):  
Boris B. Bulatov ◽  
◽  
Alexander S. Dezhnev ◽  

The article examines the normative legal basis of the grounds for canceling property seizure in pre-trial criminal proceedings. The problem of the legislator’s usage of evaluative categories in removing investigator’s, interrogator’s or court’s restrictions is also analyzed. The solution of this problem is made dependent on the implementation of public or private interests. Discussing these issues, the authors come to the conclusion that this sphere is neither presented nor analyzed in academic monographic works. This circumstance indicates the novelty of the study owing to the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the issue. The conclusion about the priority of public principles over private interests concerning matters which are not related to civil lawsuits is made on the grounds of empirical data and the analysis of legislative approaches. The contradictions of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation regulating the basis and procedure for canceling property seizure and the laws on bankruptcy are identified. The directions for improving the legal regulation of these issues are presented. The necessity of a multisectoral regulation of some aspects of law enforcement is inferred. The examination of private principles in canceling property seizure is connected with securing a civil lawsuit in criminal proceedings. The authors substantiate the existence of additional opportunities in making decisions in this field via the legal regime. This regime is also used in some other legal acts and may be put into practice in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. However, the imposed restrictions can be canceled on the basis of the decision by a person considering a criminal case. The authors note the incoherence of some provisions of Part 3 and Part 9 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. This incoherence is connected with different approaches to the view on public and private interests in decision making. The authors substantiate the necessity of a legal linking of grounds for canceling property seizure with the decision on imposing this resriction. The conclusion about the comprehensive order of property seizure is made in the final part of the article. It is also stated that this order does not contain distinct criteria of the legality of the decision. Certain parts of the criminal procedure laws should be corrected. Some ways to improve the field of legal regulation concerning the opportunity of canceling seizure are given.


2021 ◽  
pp. 226-237
Author(s):  
A. A. Muhitdinov

At the present stage of development of the criminal procedural legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, many legal institutions that have a long history of doctrinal development have received normative consolidation. Among them is the institution of participants leading the criminal process at the stage of pre-trial investigation. In the history of Uzbekistan, the activities of these subjects of the criminal process were regulated by numerous normative legal acts, including codified ones. The first Criminal Procedure Code of the Uzbek SSR was adopted in 1926. Soon the Uzbek SSR Criminal Procedure Code of 1929 entered into force. In comparative legal terms, the latter was significantly inferior to the previous one in terms of the degree of detail in the regulation of criminal procedural relations with the participation of pre-trial investigation bodies. Analysis of the content of the legal norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1929, regulating the activities of these bodies, allows us to identify features that, from the standpoint of the modern vision of the optimal model of the Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan, are assessed as shortcomings in the legal regulation of the relevant public relations. As such, we can name the following: the CPC does not contain norms defining the sources of criminal procedural law; the code does not provide for a separate chapter devoted exclusively to investigative actions, a detailed description of their procedural form; there is no clear delineation of the competence of the bodies of inquiry and the investigator; the investigator is by law entrusted with supervisory functions that are not characteristic of him in relation to the bodies of inquiry; the Criminal Procedure Code does not include a norm prohibiting persons conducting a preliminary investigation from obtaining evidence by violence, threats, etc.; The Criminal Procedure Code determined the existence of sufficient data, and not evidence, as the basis for the accusation. After being charged, the person acquired the status of a defendant, not an accused; the application of preventive measures, including detention, was carried out by the investigator independently, without the sanction of the prosecutor, which testified to the absence of guarantees of the observance of the right to personal inviolability.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 105-112
Author(s):  
O. A. Myadzelets ◽  

The article analyzes the features of the criminal procedure regulation in the countries of the near abroad of relations arising during the rehabilitation of the accused (suspect). The similarity (coincidence) and originality of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the neighboring countries in the regulation of the grounds and consequences of rehabilitation is shown. Special attention is paid to the procedure of compensation for damage caused to the rehabilitated person by illegal actions of the court of the bodies that carried out criminal proceedings. The article reveals the specifics of the approaches of legislators from different countries of the near abroad to the regulation of the procedure for compensation for moral damage. In the final part of the article, it is argued and formulated the conclusion that special, detailed regulation in separate sections (chapters) of the Criminal Procedure Code for the issues of compensation for harm to rehabilitated persons is one of the main trends in the modern criminal procedure legislation of the CIS countries.


Author(s):  
Svetlana V. Verkhoturova ◽  
Oksana V. Pavlenko

This article examines the current theoretical and practical issues of criminal proceedings against minors in the light of recent changes in the criminal procedure legislation. The research was conducted using formal-logical and dialectic methods, as well as the comparative-legal method when analyzing criminal and legal proceedings against minors. The authors conclude that a number of existing criminal procedure norms regulating the preliminary investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court against minors do not meet international standards and require further improvement. This article draws attention to the procedural errors of investigators (inquirers) and judges that are allowed in the process of investigation and consideration of criminal cases in court in relation to minor suspects, accused persons, defendants. The lack of sufficient legal regulation in the criminal procedure law is called the main reason for the mistakes made in the criminal proceedings against minors. In order to solve the identified problems, the authors propose to make appropriate additions to the current criminal procedure law.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (Extra-A) ◽  
pp. 304-310
Author(s):  
Viktor Victorovich Pushkarev ◽  
Alexander Ivanovic Gaevoy ◽  
Andrei Gennadievich Kolchurin ◽  
Nikolay Nikolaevich Bukharov ◽  
Nikolay Kazimirovich Pcholovsky

The article pays close attention to the problems of ensuring the principle of adversarial parties by the investigator at the end of the criminal prosecution of a person, by preparing an indictment in a criminal case, for its further referral by the prosecutor to the court.  The article reveals the significant issues of ensuring the principle of competition at the end of the criminal prosecution of a person in a pre-trial order, due to which, the domestic judicial and investigative practice and the relevant decisions of the European Court of Human Rights are analyzed.  The obtained data form the basis of the theoretical and legal justification of the need to change the current version of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in order to improve the mechanism of legal regulation of criminal procedure relations arising at the end of the preliminary investigation with an indictment.  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document