scholarly journals TRANSFORMATION OF SCIENTIFIC IDEAS ABOUT THE SUBJECT OF EVIDENCE IN RUSSIAN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 881-885
Author(s):  
V.A. Sementsov ◽  
V.A. Tsatsuro
Keyword(s):  
Modern Science ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Subject ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Scientific Ideas

The subject of proof is a scientific category that has historically been represented. Modern science of criminal procedure, accumulated knowledge about the sphere of evidence, including its subject, and the ongoing modernization of criminal procedure law allow us to look at the subject of evidence from a new perspective when assessing its content and main features. According to the authors, the subject of proof, taking into account the purpose of criminal proceedings, stipulated in art. 6 code of criminal procedure, allows to significantly adjust its definition, pointing out the components of his circumstances, as the impact on constitutional rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of participants of criminal proceedings and other involved in the field of entities.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

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".

scholarly journals Prohibition of interrogation of notaries as witnesses in criminal proceedings

1970 ◽  
pp. 345-349
Author(s):  
Ulyana Polyak
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Notary Public ◽  
Made In

The current criminal procedure law of Ukraine stipulates that a witness is obliged to give a true testimony during pre-trial investigation and trial, however, the legislator made an exception for this by specifying the categories of persons who have been granted immunity from immunity, ie they are released by law. testify. The article deals with the problems of law and practice regarding the prohibition of the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings and the release of him from the obligation to keep the notarial secret by the person who entrusted him with the information which is the subject of this secret. The notion of notarial secrecy is proposed to be changed, since the subject of this secrecy is not only information that became known to the notary public from the interested person, but also those information that the notary received from other sources in the performance of their professional duties, as well as the procedural activity of the notary himself, is aimed at achieving a certain legal result. The proposal made in the legal literature to supplement the CPC of Ukraine with the provisions that a notary is subject to interrogation as a witness on information that constitutes a notarial secret, if the notarial acts were declared illegal in accordance with the procedure established by law The proposal to increase the list of persons who are not subject to interrogation as witnesses about the information constituting a notarial secret is substantiated, this clause is proposed to be supplemented by provisions that, apart from the notary, are not notarized, other notarials, notaries as well as the persons mentioned in Part 3 of Art. 8 of the Law of Ukraine "On Notary". Amendments to the current CPC of Ukraine by the amendments proposed in this publication will significantly improve the law prohibiting the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings, as well as improve certain theoretical provisions of the institute of witness immunity in criminal proceedings.

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 Criminal procedure principles in defendant hearing

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Željko Mirkov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Crucial Issue ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Party Control ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Uniform Definition ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Although there is no uniform definition of procedural principles in criminal procedure theory, they can be defined as legal rules or guidelines on which the criminal proceedings are based. As such, the principles of criminal procedure law apply to procedural entities and procedural actions. Evidentiary actions, as a type of procedural action, clarify the criminal case that is the subject of the criminal proceedings. The Criminal Procedure Code stipulates several evidentiary actions, one of which is the preliminary hearing of the defendant. The defendant hearing, in which the defendant gives their testimony, is given a great deal of attention because it represents one of the most important pieces of evidence, and the course of evidence presentation is the most significant and crucial issue of the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the paper will present a review of the criminal procedure principles related to this evidentiary action, starting from the principle of legality as the main principle, followed by the principles of orality, publicity, immediacy and adversity (party control of facts and means of proof).

scholarly journals On the Forms of Rationality and the Specifics of Implementing the Principle of Procedural Economy in the Criminal Procedure Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-670
Author(s):  
Zaure Ayupova ◽  
Daurenbek Кussainov ◽  
Zhanyl Madalieva ◽  
Gulbakhsha Mussabayeva ◽  
Gulnar Rakhimova
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Cultural Economic ◽  
Political Pluralism ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Republic

The authors present a thorough research of the forms of rationality and the specifics of implementing the principles of procedural economy in the criminal procedure law of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Modern reforms of Kazakhstan’s legal system affected the criminal law sphere as well. The authors have conducted a comprehensive examination and analysis of the principles of procedural economy, effectiveness and rationality of criminal proceedings in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Under the current Criminal Procedure Code of the RK, the initial stage of the criminal process has been considerably transformed: the pre-investigation verification and initiation of a criminal case has been totally removed from it, which has considerably reduced a rather vast list of actions preceding the stage of initiating a criminal case. The dominant function of a democratic state is the protection of the constitutional rights of its citizens. It means that all branches of state power — legislative, executive and judicial — should serve the protection of the rights of a person, while other functions of the state – social, economic, political, environmental protection, public law and order — should comply with it. Different legal phenomena, relations, processes, interconnections and interactions in the legal sphere itself and, partially, outside it compose a special public system — the legal system, which develops relatively independently and functions alongside other public systems — social, spiritual-cultural, economic and state-political ones. The legal system is the condition and, simultaneously, the consequence of building a legal state and a civil society, representative democracy and political pluralism. The process of developing a legal state in the Republic of Kazakhstan is progressing successfully, some experience has been accumulated, and the positive experience of civilized countries that have achieved certain success in this area is implemented. The problem of procedural economy, effectiveness and rationality of criminal proceedings must be considered through the prism of the above-mentioned requirements.

Digital Transformation of Russian Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-99
Author(s):  
E. V. Markovicheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Digital Transformation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Impact

Introduction. Currently, in most states, criminal process undergoes a transformation under the influence of digital technology. However, compared to other types of legal proceedings, criminal process is more conservative and less inclined towards the modernization of information. Despite this, problems of digitalization of criminal proceedings are being actively investigated by scientists. In some states, practical use of digital technologies in criminal proceedings has already been attempted, which requires study. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The theoretical basis of the study was Russian and foreign scientific works in the field of criminal procedure law, devoted to the problems of introducing informational technologies into criminal proceedings. Comparative legal analysis revealed the general directions in the digital transformation of the criminal process in modern states. Based on the formal legal method and general scientific methods, the features of the consideration of criminal cases by the courts in the context of the active introduction of new technologies are investigated. Results. The article reveals promising directions for introducing digital technologies into the Russian criminal process. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the activity of courts for the examination of criminal case materials is assessed. Discussion and Conclusion. The digitalization of criminal proceedings ensures their optimization and can transform the mechanisms of protecting and ensuring the rights of participants in the process. Modern technologies can be used during certain stages of criminal proceedings and in the making of procedural decisions both in judicial and in pre-trial stages. However, further scientific research of the issues under consideration, as well as preparation of conceptual suggestions to the legislator with the purpose of changing the norms of the current criminal procedure law are necessary.

scholarly journals Kedudukan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 Dalam Mengatasi Kendala Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Korporasi (The Role Of Regulation Of The Supreme Court Number 13 Year 2016 In Overcoming Obstacles Of Corporate Criminal Infringement)

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Corporate Crime ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Corruption Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject

The prevention of corporate crime in Indonesia is constrained due to unclear management of corporate crime. In order to overcome the imperfection of such arrangements, the Supreme Court issued Supreme Court Regulation No.13 of 2016 on the Procedures for Corruption Case Handling by Corporations. There are questions that arise, what are the obstacles faced by Law Enforcement in an effort to overcome corporate crime and how the role of Perma No. 13 of 2016 in overcoming the obstacles to overcome the criminal act of the corporation? Normative legal research method is used to answer the problem. Normatively, from various laws governing the corruption of the subject of crime, there is no detailed formulation of corporate handling procedures so that law enforcers experience difficulties in conducting the criminal proceedings against the corporation. Article 79 of the Law on the Supreme Court provides the legal basis that if there is a legal deficiency in the course of the judiciary in any case, the Supreme Court has the authority to enact legislation to fill such shortcomings or vacancies. Perma No.13 of 2016 can be used as a guide for Law Enforcement to overcome technical obstacles of corporation criminal procedure law. Nevertheless, Perma has limitation so that required update of corporation criminal procedure in RKUHAP. AbstrakPenanggulangan tindak pidana korporasi di Indonesia mengalami kendala akibat tidak jelasnya pengaturan penanganan tindak pidana korporasi. Dalam rangka mengatasi ketidaksempurnaan pengaturan tersebut, Mahkamah Agung menerbitkan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung No.13 Tahun 2016 tentang Tata Cara Penanganan Perkara Tindak Pidana Oleh Korporasi. Ada pertanyaan yang mengemuka yaitu apa saja kendala yang dihadapi Penegak Hukum dalam upaya menanggulangi tindak pidana korporasi dan bagaimana peran Perma Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 dalam mengatasi kendala penanggulangan tindak pidana korporasi tersebut? Metode penelitian hukum normatif digunakan untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut. Secara normatif, dari berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur korporasi subjek tindak pidana, tidak dirumuskan detail tata cara penanganan korporasi sehingga penegak hukum mengalami kendala dalam melakukan proses pemidanaan terhadap korporasi. Pasal 79 Undang-Undang tentang Mahkamah Agung memberikan dasar hukum bahwa apabila dalam jalannya peradilan terdapat kekurangan atau kekosongan hukum dalam suatu hal, Mahkamah Agung memiliki wewenang membuat peraturan untuk mengisi kekurangan atau kekosongan tersebut. Perma No. 13 Tahun 2016 dapat dijadikan pedoman bagi Penegak Hukum untuk mengatasi kendala teknis hukum acara pidana korporasi. Namun, Perma tersebut memiliki keterbatasan sehingga diperlukan pembaruan hukum acara pidana korporasi dalam RKUHAP.

scholarly journals Subject and limits of examination evidence in the proceedings of the criminal case in the court of first instance

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-195
Author(s):  
Ilya N. Yefimovykh
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Court Of First Instance ◽  
Special Order

The article analyzes the norms of the criminal procedure law, the opinions of scientists, judicial practice materials related to the examination of evidence in criminal proceedings in the court of first instance, on the basis of which the author proposed definitions of the notions subject of examination evidence and limits of examination evidence they were compared with the concepts of subject of proof and limits of proof. The study used such research methods as logical, system-structural, statistical. As a result of a study of specific court decisions in criminal cases, differences in the understanding of evidence and the examination of evidence were revealed. A distinction has been made between the subject and the object of the study of evidence at the court hearing. The question of determining the subject matter and the limits of the examination of evidence was analyzed, including with regard to the consideration of the criminal case in a special order of judicial decision of the court, with the consent of the accused with the accusation. The rationale for the view that the examination of evidence takes place during the examination of a criminal case under a special court procedure is given, the circumstances that can be established during the court session, namely, the circumstances that may lead to exemption from punishment, as well as the postponement are analyzed. serving the sentence. These circumstances, if any, are mandatory to be established in court proceedings through the examination of evidence. According to the results of the analysis, proposed measures to improve the norms of the criminal procedure law governing the consideration of the criminal case in a special order of the trial. The question of the scope of the examination of evidence was considered in conjunction with the norms of the criminal procedure law, which established the grounds for the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor.

scholarly journals PROCEDURAL FEATURES OF INVESTIGATORS (SEARCH) ACTIONS AS MEANS OF COLLECTING EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST JUVENILES

2020 ◽  
pp. 400-407
Author(s):  
К. С. Рябченко
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Psychological Characteristics ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Subject ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Procedural Rights ◽  
Material Evidence ◽  
Factual Data

The relevance of the article is that evidence in criminal proceedings is the most important part, which is carried out in the manner prescribed by law by the investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge and court with the participation of other participants in criminal proceedings to collect, verify and evaluate factual data (evidence) to establish the reality, substantiate the conclusions and decisions taken. The procedural form of proof is determined by its content. In essence, proving includes cognitive, communicative, witnessing, and mental activity. The first element of the process of proving is the collection of evidence, which consists in identifying sources and carriers of evidentiary information, obtaining, seizing material evidence, fixing, fixing in the statutory procedural form of factual data. One of the most effective procedural ways of gathering evidence is investigative (search) actions. The aim of the work is to analyze the current criminal procedure legislation and the position of scholars on the theory of criminal procedure on the procedure for conducting investigative (search) actions during the investigation of criminal offenses committed by minors. The article is devoted to the study of procedural features of investigative (search) actions with the participation of a minor. Problems were clarified and proposals for their solution were proposed by making changes and additions to the criminal procedural legislation to ensure the realization of procedural rights and legitimate interests of the juvenile. It is concluded that the conduct of investigative (search) actions as a means of obtaining evidence in criminal proceedings against minors are based on the characteristics of the subject of such proceedings - minors. In order to ensure the realization of the procedural rights of a minor, it is proposed to enshrine in the CPC of Ukraine certain provisions that will formulate an order that least disrupts the normal lifestyle of a minor and will correspond to his age and psychological characteristics.

scholarly journals On the improvement of work management in authorities of the prosecutor's office on consideration of complaints of the parties to criminal proceedings against actions (or inaction) and decisions of the investigator and the prosecutor

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Popov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Single Instance ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Work Management

This article raises the questions on the improvement of work management in the prosecutorial branches on consideration of complaints of the parties to criminal proceedings against actions (or inaction) and decisions of the investigator and the prosecutor. Analysis is conducted on the existing in the prosecutor’s office procedure of pretrial dispute, which legislative consolidation is associated with usage of the term “superior prosecutor”. The subject of this research is the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, executive documents of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation and prosecutor's offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as scientific literature on the topic at hand. The conclusion is made that the current legislation and the established law enforcement practice assume on the recurrent appeal on the same instance of violation of law within a single prosecutorial branch, and thus do not effectively protect the rights and legitimate interests of the parties involved in the criminal procedure sphere. For this reason, the author makes recommendations on the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation aimed at adjustment of the procedure of consideration of complaints of the parties to criminal proceedings, which would ensure their resolution within the framework of a single prosecutorial branch in a single instance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document