scholarly journals PECULIARITIES OF PROCEDURAL PROCEDURE FOR INITIATING CRIMINAL CASES OF TAX OFFENCES

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
V.Yu. Stelmakh
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Second Procedure

The article analyses the peculiarities of the procedural procedure for initiating criminal cases of tax offences. The initiation of criminal proceedings for these crimes is of a public and legal nature, combining two public interests. The first interest is due to the need to initiate criminal proceedings in connection with the detection of a criminal act. The second interest is caused by the task of ensuring full payment of taxes. On this basis, when initiating criminal proceedings for a tax offence, a participant such as a tax authority carrying out certain criminal proceedings appears. The Modern Criminal Procedure Act provides for two procedures for initiating criminal proceedings under the category of offences under consideration. The first procedure applies in cases where the fact of the tax offence is revealed by the tax authority. The application to the preliminary investigation body is preceded by a procedure regulated by tax law to apply to the taxpayer in order to obtain payment of tax from him. Only in case of failure of the taxpayer to comply with this obligation and only after the expiry of certain terms the tax authority transmits the information to the preliminary investigation body. The second procedure is used in cases where the fact of the commission of a tax offence is identified directly by the preliminary investigation body. In this case, the tax authority gives an opinion on the existence in the taxpayer 's actions of the elements of the tax offence and provides calculations on the amount of the shortfall.

Analyzing Foundations of Imposing a Monetary Penalty on Parties to a Criminal Proceeding

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 682
Author(s):  
Arman SAKHARBAY ◽  
Askar Kadyrovich KALIYEV ◽  
Moldir Saparbekkyzy BAIKOMUROVA
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Regulatory Systems ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Original Approach

The research analyzes the possible application and effectiveness of a monetary penalty as one of the most useful sanctions to maintain the established order of criminal justice, as well as develops constructive proposals to improve the criminal procedure legislation based on the conducted survey. To this end, the authors of the article have studied the criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan and legislation on administrative offenses, considered scientific opinions presented in numerous publications on relevant topics and conducted a comparative analysis of regulatory systems in Kazakhstan, Germany, Austria, the USA and the UK. As a result, the authors have established that one of the main reasons hindering the adequate implementation of criminal justice is the violation of obligations to participate in criminal proceedings by persons named in the Criminal Procedure Code of Kazakhstan. To maintain procedural discipline, the court is provided with ample opportunities in the form of coercive measures, including a monetary penalty. The authors have investigated the legal nature of a monetary penalty and compared it with administrative fines. The authors have considered grounds and application procedures for this sanction in the criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan and some foreign legal systems. The authors have determined the problems of its implementation caused by the slovenly legislation of a monetary penalty that impedes law enforcement activity. A comprehensive analysis allows developing proposals for improving the use of monetary penalties as measures of coercion for criminal cases heard in the court. If these proposals are enshrined in the existing regulatory framework and put into practice, they will strengthen the discipline of parties to criminal proceedings, ensure the strict observance of criminal proceedings and increase their general effectiveness. Due to its conclusions and proposals, the article demonstrates the novelty of the conducted research, the authors' original approach to the analysis of information and innovative ways to improve the existing legislative framework.

Genesis of the Criminal Procedure on Liability of Legal Persons on Russia

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Ольга Семыкина ◽  
Olga Semykina
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Remedial Measures ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Positive Assessment ◽  
Legal Entities

The article deals with the legislative and doctrinal precondition of criminal liability of legal persons, which are accumulated a concept formed the basis of the judicial reform of 1864. The author studies the practice the first phase of the introduction in to the Russian criminal procedure enforcement of the measures applicable to legal persons for acts committed during preliminary investigation of crimes. In this context, the article lays emphasis on the norms of the Charter of criminal proceedings of 1864, which contain the procedural peculiarities of the application of such a measures to legal entities as closure, as well as monitors the judicial practice on the criminal liability of legal persons. The article gives a positive assessment of the approach of the legislator to the possibility of the implementation of remedial measures in criminal proceedings on such corruption crimes as crimes against property and income of the treasury. Given these positions, the author comes to the conclusion of the possibility of application of measures of criminal procedure liability of legal persons under preliminary investigation in criminal cases of crimes that infringe on budget forming industries.

CURRENT ISSUES OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MINORS IN THE CONTEXT OF MODERN REALITY

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-164
Author(s):  
Svetlana V. Verkhoturova ◽  
Oksana V. Pavlenko
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Made In

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.

scholarly journals On the Right of the Accused Parties to an Appeal of Interim Court Decisions Made at the Pre-Trial Stage: Protection of Private and Public Interests

2020 ◽  
pp. 47-52
Author(s):  
Polina O. Gertsen ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Of Appeal

The article examines the problem of determining the list of participants on the part of the prosecution, endowed with the right to appeal the interim decisions made at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings. Currently, the appeal and revision of interim decisions are carried according to Chapter 45.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. However, Chapter does not take into account the specificity of the preliminary investigation stage, in particular, the subject composition of its participants. As a result, the list of the subjects entitled to appeal of the interim court decisions at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings remains controversial. The article discusses the right of the investigator and the head of the investigative body to file an appeal as well as the right of the victim to initiate proceedings in the court of appeal in defense of private interest. Drawing on the analysis of literature and practices of appealing interim court decisions, the author identifies the problems of theory and practice, including: 1) the prosecutor’s right to appeal is not sufficient to ensure tp protect public interests; 2) the controversial right of the investigator, or the head of the investigative body to file a complaint with the court of appeal; 3) there is no legal obligation of state bodies to notify the victim about the initiation of a petition before the court for a preventive measure or an investigative action, which may prevent the victim from exercising their right to appeal. The author proposes: 1) to supplement the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation with a list of subjects for filing (presenting) a complaint of interim decisions, including the investigator as the main participant in the process at the stage of preliminary investigation; 2) to legislate the investigator’s obligation to notify the victim about the initiation of a petition before the court for the application of a preventive measure, placement of the accused in a hospital for an examination, etc., as well as the obligation of the court to send the victim copies of decisions on these petitions.

scholarly journals Legacy of M. S. Strogovich and Modern Problems of Functional-Legal Construction of Criminal Pre-Trial Proceedings

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 495-513
Author(s):  
Yu. V. Derishev
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Scientific Heritage ◽  
125Th Anniversary ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Definition Of

In November 2019, the world legal community widely celebrated the 125th anniversary of Professor M. S. Strogovich, who, according to his scientific colleagues and students, was a scientist who was “ahead of time”.This article provides a retrospective and comparative analysis of the positions of M. S. Strogovich and his colleagues on certain problems of domestic criminal proceedings, in particular its pre-trial phase, in the context of the direct influence of the scientist's scientific heritage on the development of modern criminal procedure law. The Author of the article particularly interesting views of the scientist and his participation in discussions related to defining the essence and purpose of the preliminary investigation, the implementation of the functions of preliminary investigation in relation to criminal prosecution, the problems of implementation of the principles of presumption of innocence and the adversarial nature of pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases, and, finally, the General Manager of the “investigative case” in modern Russia.M. S. Strogovich consistently adhered to the idea of the need to develop and strengthen procedural guarantees of individual rights, guarantees of justice, and this can be seen in this article. Thus, defining the essence of the criminal process as a system of actions of the relevant officials and the procedural legal relations that arise in connection with them, which in itself was a serious “scientific courage” of those years, M. S. Strogovich particularly defended the position that all participants in criminal proceedings are subjects of the rights granted to them and the duties assigned to them, and they should not be considered objects of unilateral power of officials. This idea has become widespread and generally accepted as the basic definition of domestic (Soviet and Russian) criminal proceedings.The article analyzes M. S. Strogovich’s scientific steps on the conceptual turn from revolutionary-radical ideas about the construction of criminal proceedings to its classical canons and traditions of the Russian criminal process, On the basis of which the conclusion is made about the indispensable use of the scientist's legacy in modernьRussian procedural studies.The research of M. S. Strogovich’s legacy carried out in the article will fully allow to rethink the modern system of criminal proceedings in a new way, can be used as a kind of key to finding solutions to law-making and law enforcement problems, for the further development of the national science of criminal procedure law.

scholarly journals CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FUNCTIONS AND POWERS OF THE PROSECUTOR AS FACTORS DETERMINING THE SPECIFICS OF PROSECUTOR's SUPERVISION IN PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-132
Author(s):  
A.A. Nasonov
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

The article analyzes the opinions of scientists expressed during the scientific discussion that unfolded around the issue of criminal procedure functions of the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. Provides additional arguments in favor of supervision of execution of laws as the main function of the Prosecutor under the Law on the Prosecutor determines other types of prosecutorial activities (criminal prosecution, the preliminary investigation, etc.) that are supportive in nature. These types of Prosecutor's activities are not only ways to specify Prosecutor's supervision in criminal proceedings, but also means of implementing the criminal procedure function of the prosecution, which exists according to the concept of the current criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, focused on the adversarial process, along with the function of protection and the function of resolving criminal cases. The article also addresses the issue of granting additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings. It is proved that the decision to grant additional powers to the Prosecutor in pre-trial proceedings should create opportunities to maintain the necessary balance in pre-trial proceedings between Prosecutor's supervision, departmental control and judicial control. Evidence is given that the harmonious existence of Prosecutor's supervision and departmental control in pre-trial proceedings will allow us to count on overcoming existing violations of the law in the investigation of crimes, which currently remain many.

scholarly journals Seizure of Property as a Way to Ensure Compensation for Damage Caused by a Crime: Theory and Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-210
Author(s):  
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov ◽  
Marina Vladimirovna Sokolova ◽  
Oksana Leonidovna Podustova ◽  
Pavel Vladimirovich Fadeev ◽  
Alexey Yurievich Molyanov
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Crime Theory ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Identifying Property

The authors consider the theoretical provisions and analyze practical examples of the activities of the investigative bodies to seize property in pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases. The relevance of this topic is determined by the fact that one of the priority activities of the preliminary investigation bodies at present is to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of citizens against criminal encroachments. The possibility of compensation to victims of harm caused by a crime in criminal procedure law is a guarantee of protection of these rights and contributes to the implementation of the purpose of criminal proceedings. Based on the results obtained, the authors conclude that it is necessary to further improve the law enforcement practice and the norms of criminal and criminal-procedure legislation in order to improve the efficiency of solving problems of identifying property that can be seized. In this connection, it is proposed to amend Part 3 of Article 104.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, providing for the possibility of confiscation of property, regardless of the awareness of the causal relationship between the committed act and the presence of money or other property.Keywords: Criminal proceedings; Measures of procedural coercion; Investigator; Inquirer; Civil claim Penyitaan Properti sebagai Cara untuk Memastikan Kompensasi atas Kerusakan yang Disebabkan oleh Kejahatan: Teori dan Praktik AbstrakPenulis mempertimbangkan ketentuan teoritis dan menganalisis contoh praktis dari kegiatan badan investigasi untuk menyita properti dalam proses pra-persidangan dalam kasus pidana. Relevansi topik ini ditentukan oleh fakta bahwa salah satu kegiatan prioritas badan investigasi pendahuluan saat ini adalah memastikan hak dan kepentingan sah warga negara terhadap perambahan kriminal. Kemungkinan pemberian ganti rugi kepada korban kerugian yang diakibatkan oleh suatu tindak pidana dalam hukum acara pidana merupakan jaminan perlindungan terhadap hak-hak tersebut dan turut menunjang terlaksananya tujuan proses pidana. Berdasarkan hasil yang diperoleh, penulis menyimpulkan bahwa perlu lebih meningkatkan praktik penegakan hukum dan norma-norma peraturan perundang-undangan pidana dan acara pidana untuk meningkatkan efisiensi penyelesaian masalah identifikasi harta benda yang dapat disita. Sehubungan dengan itu, diusulkan untuk mengubah Bagian 3 Pasal 104.1 KUHP Federasi Rusia, yang mengatur kemungkinan penyitaan properti, terlepas dari kesadaran akan hubungan sebab akibat antara tindakan yang dilakukan dan adanya uang atau properti lainnya.Kata Kunci: Proses pidana; Tindakan paksaan prosedural; Peneliti; Penanya; Klaim sipil. Наложение ареста на имущество в целях обеспечения возмещения вреда, причиненного преступлением: теория и практика АннотацияАвторами рассматриваются теоретические положения и анализируются практические примеры деятельности органов расследования по наложению ареста на имущество в досудебном производстве по уголовным делам. Актуальность данной темы определяется тем, что одним из приоритетных направлений деятельности органов предварительного следствия в настоящее время является обеспечение прав и законных интересов граждан от преступных посягательств. Возможность возмещения потерпевшим вреда, причиненного преступлением, в уголовно-процессуальном праве является гарантией защиты данных прав и способствует реализации назначения уголовного судопроизводства. На основе полученных результатов авторы приходят к выводу о необходимости дальнейшего совершенствования правоприменительной практики и норм уголовного и уголовно-процессуального законодательства в целях повышения эффективности решения задач по установлению  имущества, на которое может быть наложен арест. В связи с чем предлагают внести в ч. 3 ст. 104.1 УК РФ изменения, предусматривающие возможность конфискации имущества, вне зависимости от осведомленности о причинно-следственной связи между совершенным деянием и наличием денег или иного имущества.Ключевые слова: Ключевые слова: уголовное судопроизводство, меры процессуального принуждения, следователь, дознаватель, гражданский иск

SOME QUESTIONS OF PROCEDURAL POWERS IMPLEMENTATION BY EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL PENITENTIARY SERVICE OF RUSSIA WHEN MAKING PROCEDURAL DECISIONS AT THE STAGE OF INITIATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2020 ◽  
pp. 144-148
Author(s):  
Александр Валентинович Черезов
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Procedural Decisions

В статье рассматриваются актуальные проблемы реализации уголовно-процессуальных полномочий органов и учреждений УИС в стадии возбуждения уголовного дела. В частности, рассмотрена проблема и дано определение компетенции органов дознания и предварительного следствия, предусмотренной УПК РФ. Исследован объем уголовно-процессуальных прав и обязанностей органов дознания и следствия, а также оперативных подразделений УИС в системе иных органов дознания и следствия. Проведен анализ порядка принятия решений уполномоченными должностными лицами ФСИН России при проверке сообщений о преступлениях, выражено мнение о том, что они вправе принимать только одно решение: о передаче сообщения о преступлении по подследственности и в исключительных случаях возбуждать уголовные дела в порядке, предусмотренном ст. 157 УПК РФ. Рассмотрены причины, на основании которых законодатель уменьшил полномочия оперативных подразделений ФСИН России как органа дознания. Рассмотрены актуальность применения ст. 157 УПК РФ в части возбуждения уголовных дел и проведения по ним неотложных следственных действий, а также роль начальников органов и учреждений УИС в их проведении. На основании рассмотренных проблем подведен итог о нечеткой регламентации процессуальных полномочий органов и учреждений ФСИН России в уголовно-процессуальном законе и подзаконных актах на стадии возбуждения уголовного дела. The article deals with the actual problems of implementation of the criminal procedure powers of the criminal procedure authorities and institutions at the stage of criminal proceedings. In particular, we consider the problem and the definition of the competence of bodies of inquiry and preliminary investigation under code of criminal procedure. The volume of criminal procedure rights and obligations of operational divisions of the criminal investigation department in the system of other bodies of inquiry and investigation is studied. The analysis of the procedure for decision-making by authorized officials of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia when checking reports of crimes is carried out. The reasons why the legislator reduced the powers of operational divisions of the Federal penitentiary service of Russia as a body of inquiry are considered. The relevance of the application of article 157 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation in terms of criminal cases and conducting urgent investigative actions on them, as well as the role of the heads of criminal investigation bodies and institutions in their conduct, were reviewed. Based on the problems discussed, the author summarizes the lack of regulation of the procedural powers of the Federal Penitentiary Service bodies and institutions in the criminal procedure law and by-laws at the stage of initiation of a criminal case.

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".

THE RETURN OF CRIMINAL CASES FOR THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF ERRORS IN THE CASE OF THE PARTICIPATION OF AN INTERPRETER)

2021 ◽  
pp. 57-61
Author(s):  
В.О. Захарова
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases

Автором проанализированы основные положения участия переводчика в уголовном судопроизводстве. Даны рекомендации по осуществлению взаимодействия следователя с переводчиком. Приведены типичные ошибки, возникающие при участии переводчика в уголовном судопроизводстве и даны рекомендации по осуществлению взаимодействия переводчика со следователем. The author analyzes the main provisions of the interpreter’s participation in criminal proceedings. Recommendations are given on the implementation of the interaction of the investigator with the translator. Typical errors that occur with the participation of an interpreter in criminal proceedings are presented and recommendations are given for the interaction of an interpreter with an investigator.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document