scholarly journals Public Prosecutor’s Inspection as a Guarantee of Compliance with the Law during Initiation of Criminal Proceedings

2017 ◽  
pp. 41-45
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Primary Method ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Compliance With The Law

The author states that the stage of initiation of criminal proceedings must serve as a barrier for unjustified criminal prosecution. It means that a significant role on this stage belongs to prosecutors. The primary method of enforcing the law is prosecutors’ inspection. However, a lack of appropriate legal regulation of prosecutors’ supervision in the Russian legislation on criminal procedure prevents effective application of prosecutors’ powers. A lack of systematic regulation of prosecutors’ inspection, legislative gaps and collisions result in significant inefficiency of the prosecutors’ supervision. The article sets out the results of the surveys conducted by the author among the employees of prosecutor’s offices. The majority of respondents found it necessary to define the «prosecutor’s inspection on compliance with law» in the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. Also it is essential that the reasons, motives and limits of prosecutors’ inspection in the stage of initiation of criminal proceedings are defined in the legislation.

scholarly journals Discretionary Model of Legal Regulation of a Criminal Case and Criminal Prosecution Termination: Pro et Contra

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 214-222
Author(s):  
G. N. Kucherov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law

The paper discusses the issues of choosing the most effective model of criminal proceedings termination, analyzes the proposed in the scientific literature model of refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer when making an appropriate procedural decision. The author, based on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, studies the relationship between the principle of justice and the legality of procedural decisions to terminate a criminal case and criminal prosecution. The author concludes that the discretionary model of legal regulation of a criminal case and criminal prosecution termination is an effective means of achieving the purpose of criminal proceedings, allowing the law enforcement officer to make a fair decision, given the nature, degree of social danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission, information about the identity of the person who committed the crime. Refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer in the matter of terminating a criminal case will not only not contribute to the humanization of legislation, but will mark the victory of formalism over justice in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals ON THE DEFECTS OF LEGAL REGULATION OF THE CONCEPT OF LIABILITY FOR TAX OFFENCES

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 164-182
Author(s):  
Zhanna A. Nikolaeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Tax Evasion ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The author analyzes the content of interrelated tax norms, administrative and criminal laws, which constitute the concept of liability for tax offences. The analysis makes it possible to identify the elements that cause non-compliance with the foundations of legal liability in criminal proceedings: its inevitability, equality of everyone before the law and the court, justice. Representatives of small and medium- sized businesses are placed in unequal, discriminatory circumstances in comparison with large businesses. In addition, the legislation on taxes and fees contains provisions which create obstacles for the operation of criminal and criminal procedure laws. Many instances of tax evasion, the non-payment of fees and/or insurance fees in large and especially large amounts revealed by tax services do not become known to investigative bodies. In this case, the principle of the priority of sectoral legislation ceases to work, since in criminal proceedings the provisions of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation cancel out the effect of the norms which are common to all types of crimes and express the foundations of a particular sector of law. This paper substantiates the need to improve the concept of liability for violations of the legislation on taxes and fees.

scholarly journals The subject of judicial control in consideration of complaints: controversial issues of legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
El'vira Mirgorodskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

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.

scholarly journals One-Sided and Incomplete Investigation of the Circumstances of the Case in Adversarial Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. 140-148
Author(s):  
E. A. Perova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One ◽  
Court Practice

Art. 389.15 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation contains a closed list of grounds for reversing or altering court rulings. The one-sidedness and incompleteness of the investigation of the factual circumstances of the criminal case is not indicated as one of such grounds. A one-sided or incomplete investigation of the factual circumstances of the case taken place in the course of criminal proceedings can influence the justness of the sentence. This conclusion follows from the analysis of the court practice formed after the 2013 reform. One of the goals of this reform was to obtain a “definitive judgment” upon completion of the appeal. Despite this, during the implementation of the reform, Article 389.15 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes the list of grounds for reversing or altering court rulings, was not brought into line with the objectives of the reform. The law does not provide for such a ground as an incorrect investigation by the court of the factual circumstances of the criminal case, despite the numerous facts of revealing this violation by the courts of controlling authority.

scholarly journals The investigator as an independent subject of criminal prosecution in cases of terrorist crimes

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (Especial II) ◽  
pp. 328-336
Author(s):  
Alexander Yurevich Epihin ◽  
Oleg Aleksandrovich Zaitsev ◽  
Zyufyar Shakirovich Gataullin ◽  
Larisa Gennadyevna Tatyanina ◽  
Andrey Viktorovich Mishin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Optimal Resolution ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Chief Prosecutor

This article aims to study the theory and practice of criminal prosecution of terrorist crimes in the Russian Federation. Most of the scientific work is mainly devoted to the study of criminal law and the criminological aspects of the fight against such criminal activities. It is therefore of particular importance to identify the problems of legal regulation of the investigator's activities in order to prosecute criminal offences and develop proposals for their optimal resolution. Cognitionic methods include: an anthropological, synthesis, statistics, partner, particular, systemic structural, legal modeling. In the Russian federation the prosecutor has judicial supervision in the criminal proceedings. Everything concludes that Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 87-87-05.06.2007 redistributed control of the criminal proceedings by the investigator of the corporation a series of substantive rights of the chief prosecutor of the investigating body. In this sense, the optimal proportion of departmental control and tax supervision of the investigator, such as the establishment of a reasonable balance of these powers of control and supervision, increases the effectiveness of criminal prosecution of terrorism offences.

scholarly journals Public Prosecution in the System of Criminal Procedural Functions

2019 ◽  
pp. 183-193
Author(s):  
V. N. Isaenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Semantic Content ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

The paper discusses the concept and types of criminal procedural functions, analyzes the points of view of legal scholars who at various times formulated the corresponding definition. According to the author, the semantic content set by the legislator is set forth in Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation is an important contribution to the improvement of the conceptual apparatus of criminal procedural law; it is intended to ensure uniformity of interpretation of the concepts they designate and, consequently, uniformity of action of the relevant criminal procedure institutions. At the same time, the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation has no definition of the concept of criminal procedure function. Based on the analysis of the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation and the opinions of jurists who expressed opinions on the concept of the criminal procedure function, it is proposed to include an additional clause in Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation that would contain this concept in the proposed edition of the author. It is also proposed to divide the criminal procedural functions into two groups in connection with their performance by the participants of the criminal process both at the pre-trial and at the trial stages. The opinion is expressed on the independent nature of the function of assisting criminal proceedings carried out by its other participants, referred to in Ch. 8 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. The content of the function of supporting public prosecution as a form and stage of criminal prosecution and its place in the system of other criminal procedure functions are analyzed. The author proposes a definition of the concept of public prosecution, which is considered as a necessary element and at the same time as a special form of the function of the prosecution in criminal proceedings. This activity differs significantly in terms of tasks, subject and conditions of execution from the accusatory activities of the investigating officer, investigator, body of inquiry in pre-trial proceedings.

scholarly journals International Standards of Preventive Measures and Their Implementations in the Legislation of the Russian Federation

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 623-630
Author(s):  
Dmitrii Ivanov ◽  
Michail Kulikov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Selection Of

The goal of this research is to identify problems arising during the implementation of international standards for the selection of preventive measures into Russian criminal procedure legislation. The authors specify the concept of international standards of criminal court proceedings, present the specific features of their incorporation into constitutional norms as well as rules in different branches of law. The importance of preventive measures in the general mechanism of legal regulation is shown. The authors prove the necessity of systemic changes in the part of Russian legislation that deals with the legal regulation of preventive measures with the purpose of creating an integrated mechanism of criminal prosecution and protection against it. Key findings of research include: 1) Russian criminal proceedings, including its part regulating the selection of preventive measures, should fully correspond to international standards; 2) international standards are implemented in Russian criminal procedure legislation both indirectly, though constitutional clauses, and directly, through the improvements in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; 3) preventive measures should only be selected if there are sufficient grounds for them, and these grounds are not the at the discretion of officials involved in criminal proceedings, they are real evidence in the materials of a criminal case that is necessary and sufficient for selecting a specific measure from the measures included in the law; 4) circumstances that are taken into consideration when selecting a preventive measure, if they potentially provide for a stricter measure from their general list, should be explicitly laid down in the law, and contrary to this, the list of circumstances that could improve the position of a person is not exhaustive; 5) to give a person an opportunity to defend their position, the possibility of selecting the preventive measure of detention is only feasible for the accused, and should be excluded for the suspect; 6) since the proper behavior of a person, from the position of the prosecution, is to give testimony that proves their involvement in a crime, the corresponding indication that this is necessary to ensure such behavior should be removed from the law when selecting the preventive measure of recognizance not to leave; 7) the supervision of the command staff of a military base over military personnel should not be substituted with an actual deprivation or limitation of the freedom of movement within the territory of the base; 8) when there are no grounds for selecting detention, the court should have a possibility to select any other preventive measure from those included in the law. From the methodological standpoint, this research is an analysis of international normative legal acts and generally recognized principles and norms of international law regulating preventive measures as well as the problems of their implementation in Russian criminal proceedings. The following methods were used: comparative legal, historic legal, sociological, interpretation of law norms, a number of logical methods. The obtained data was used to formulate key conclusions, which made it possible to correctly use a number of terms, and determine the necessity of a systemic improvement of Russian legislation through the introduction of mechanisms that ensure the rights, liberties and lawful interests of a person when selecting a preventive measure.

scholarly journals Prosecutor’s Decision as a Cause for Initiating Criminal Proceedings: Problems of Improving the Legislation

Legal Concept ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 131-139
Author(s):  
Natalia Solovyova ◽  
Altyn Ilyasova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compliance With The Law

Introduction: in the paper the authors reveal the essence of one of the causes for initiating a criminal case, the socalled fourth cause with the title “the prosecutor’s decision to send relevant materials to the preliminary investigation body to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution”; actual problems associated with the implementation of the powers of the Prosecutor’s office at the stage of initiating a criminal case; the essence of the supervisory powers of the Prosecutor’s office (Prosecutor) at the stages of criminal proceedings. Addressing this topic is due to the main purpose – the consideration of the concept of “prosecutor’s decision as a cause for initiating a criminal case” in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, as well as the study of topical problems of implementing the powers of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) when considering the issue of ensuring compliance with the principle of legality at all the stages of criminal proceedings. Methods: the methodological framework for the study was the general scientific method of cognition, including the principle of objectivity, consistency, induction and deduction. In the context of this method and in connection with it, the general logical methods of theoretical analysis and specific scientific methods (comparative law, technical and legal analysis, concretization, interpretation) were used. Results: considering the concept of “prosecutor’s decision as a cause for initiating a criminal case”, the authors drew attention to the role of the prosecutor in making the relevant decision on the activity management of the preliminary investigation body, indicated, that in criminal procedure law of this state the most important function of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) is the supervision over compliance with rule of law by all the bodies and officials, by virtue whereof, in practice, the implementation of two mutually exclusive powers of the Prosecutor’s office (prosecutor) can lead to the imbalance in the full implementation of the principles of criminal procedure at all procedural stages. Conclusions: as a result of the study, the authors come to the conclusion that in order to implement fair justice at the stages of criminal proceedings, it is necessary to make appropriate changes in the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, since the combination in one body of powers to initiate criminal proceedings (in particular, sending a corresponding resolution to the preliminary investigation body to resolve the issue of criminal prosecution) and the powers to supervise over compliance with the law by the preliminary investigation bodies is impossible in practice; it requires additional research and appropriate changes.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL PROCESS IN A PANDEMIC AND THEN

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
V. A. Lazareva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Document Management ◽  
Electronic Document ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Democratic Principles

Due to the emergence of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19), measures aimed at limiting its spread have made it impossible to administer justice in compliance with its democratic principles, implying the possibility of personal participation of all interested parties in court procedures to effectively defend their interests. In this regard, on April 8, 2020, the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation adopted a decree recommending that the courts, among other measures, intensify the work of Internet receptions, ensure the reception, processing and registration of documents submitted to the courts in electronic form, including in the form of an electronic document, consider cases and materials of urgent nature in court hearings using the video-conferencing system and (or) the web-conference system. Despite the fact that in accordance with the program for the development of the Russian judicial system, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2012 № 1406, the modernization of the work of courts based on digital technologies has already begun in the country, their development in criminal proceedings lags behind other methods of administering justice. Given this circumstance, as well as the actual absence in the criminal process of electronic document management and legal regulation of the grounds and procedure for conducting a trial in the mode of a web conference, the article attempts to determine the limits of the possibilities of using new technologies in criminal proceedings, to substantiate the conclusion that that the use of digital technology in criminal proceedings is not only possible, but necessary, as well as to determine the direction of development of criminal proceedings in this direction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document