Execution of a Sentence in the Structure of Criminal Proceedings: Procedural Stage or Special Court Proceedings?

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 97-106
Author(s):  
V. V. Nikolyuk ◽  
◽  
L. A. Pupysheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Self In Relation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Proceedings

The article analyzes the concept of execution of a sentence as an independent stage of the criminal process (the stage of criminal proceedings). Arguments are given that point to its certain illogicality and inconsistency. The authors on the basis of existing legislation and taking into account the positions of Plenum of the Supreme Court additionally reasoned and substantiated the thesis of the existence of the criminal process self in relation to a criminal case of criminal procedure, regulated by Chapter 47 of the Code of criminal procedure.

scholarly journals Referring a Case to the Highest Division of the Supreme Court in the Criminal Procedure Legislation of Ukraine and European Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-165
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Uniform Law ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Court Practice

The article aims to examine one of the elements of the formal mechanism of maintaining court practice unity in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and European countries – referring a case to the highest division of the Supreme Court. Similar to the Ukrainian criminal procedure legislation, the grounds for referring a criminal case and the procedure of its application are provided in the legislation of Estonia, Italy and Lithuania. At the same time, the Ukrainian legislator has established a number of special features, however, the wording of the relevant articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine is not perfect. The article provides answers to such questions as how forceful the provisions of criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine are, to what extent of effectiveness the Supreme Court exercises its legal authority regarding the unity of court practice in criminal proceedings, and whether the controversies in legal positions of the structural divisions of the Supreme Court have been successfully avoided. In order to achieve the stated aims, parts 2 and 3 are devoted to the examination of the grounds for referring a case in criminal proceedings of Ukraine and European countries. Part 4 outlines the shortcomings of the content of some articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine concerning the procedure of the referral of a criminal case to the highest division of the Supreme Court. Part 5 provides the analysis of the validity of decisions made by the boards of judges at the Supreme Court on the referral of criminal proceedings to its higher judicial divisions – the joint chamber of the Criminal Cassation Court and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. On the basis of the study of the judgements of boards, the judicial chambers of the Criminal Cassation Court and the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, in part 6 the question is answered on whether the Supreme Court of Ukraine managed to perform its duty on the assurance of court practice unity in such an area as criminal proceedings. Keywords: exclusive legal problem, development of law, formation of uniform law enforcement practice, the Supreme Court, criminal proceedings, Ukraine.

scholarly journals The use of digital communication technologies in the context of a pandemic as a way to improve the effectiveness of justice

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
E. V. Smakhtin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the peculiarities of the activity of courts in making judicial decisions in the context of a pandemic. First of all, we are talking about the wider use of digital and information technologies in criminal proceedings, which have previously been repeatedly recommended by forensic science for implementation in judicial practice. Some recommendations of criminalistics are currently accepted by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its Decision dated April 08, 2020 № 821 and Review on certain issues of judicial practice related to the application of legislation and measures to counteract the spread of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in the territory of the Russian Federation № 2, which provided appropriate explanations for their use in practice. In particular, we are talking about the possibility of using video conferencing systems for certain categories of criminal cases and materials that are considered urgent, although this is not provided for in criminal procedure legislation. It is concluded that it is necessary to change the current criminal procedure legislation, bring it into line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws, federal laws and subordinate regulatory legal acts, including orders of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals The institution of suspicion and the initial stage of the criminal process: interrelated prospects of development

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-131
Author(s):  
Ol'ga Polikarpova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Radical Change ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Initial Moment ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Kyrgyz Republic ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Initial Stage

The article considers the question of the interdependence of the improvement of the institution of suspicion and the transformation of the initial stage of the Russian criminal process. The article highlights the problem of the legislative limitation of the period of the procedural status of a person as a suspect in the event of a criminal case being initiated not against him, but upon the commission of a crime and insufficient evidence of the involvement/non-involvement of such a person in a criminal offence committed at the initial stage of the investigation, which often does not allow avoiding unreasonable restrictions on the constitutional rights and freedoms of this participant in criminal proceedings. The relevant experience of some post-Soviet states that followed the path of a radical change in the criminal procedure model after the collapse of the USSR is analysed. The article compares the provisions of the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation and the Kyrgyz Republic directly related to the institution of suspicion, including the moment of triggering criminal prosecution and the duration of a suspect’s keeping the specified procedural status. The arguments given in the article substantiate the need to reform the initial moment of the emergence of the procedural status of a suspect in Russian criminal proceedings and the associated expediency of abolishing the stage of initiation of a criminal case in order to increase the guarantee of the rights and legitimate interests of the person introduced into the procedural status we are analysing.

scholarly journals ASPEK HUKUM PENINJAUAN KEMBALI LEBIH DARI SATU KALI DALAM PERKARA PIDANA (PERSPEKTIF PENEGAKAN KEADILAN, KEPASTIAN DAN KEMANFAATAN HUKUM)

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 335
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Matters

Constitutional Court Decision No. 34 / PUU-XI / 2013 has opened the space PK is not just one time as provided for by the Article 268 paragraph (3) Criminal Procedure Code so that PK can be done many times during found and submission of PK Novum although it has done previously. Perspective is the basis of this decision is justice. Responding to the verdict of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court publishes SEMA No. 7 Year 2014 on Reconsideration Request Submission In Criminal Case. Through the SEMA Supreme Court warned that provisions PK only once outside the Article 268 Criminal Procedure Code which was canceled by the Constitutional Court, therefore, PK criminal cases (in a similar case) is more than 1 (one) can not be accepted. Restrictions on the desired PK criminal case the Supreme Court is to provide legal certainty in the process of final settlement of criminal matters. Government through Minister of Law and Human Rights take strategic steps in resolving the legal expediency vision polemic filing legal remedies PK criminal cases, by coordinating state agencies and relevant ministries so as to produce an agreement that filing PK many times can not be executed until the issuance of PP. Therefore still valid set forth in the Judicial Authority Law and the Law on the Supreme Court.Keywords : Legal Aspects, Reconsideration, Criminal Case

PECULIARITIES OF PARTICIPATION OF DEFENDER IN THE COURT PROCEEDINGS OF CRIMINAL CASE IN THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Павел Петрович Фантров ◽  
Ярослав Александрович Кузин
Keyword(s):  
Research Topic ◽  
Defense Attorney ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Correct Interpretation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Degree Of Participation ◽  
Court Of First Instance

Актуальность темы исследования обусловлена тем, что немаловажное значение в уголовном судопроизводстве имеет правильное толкование процессуального положения защитника в судебном разбирательстве в суде первой инстанции. В статье охарактеризована степень участия защитника на рассматриваемой стадии уголовного процесса: исследование им доказательств; заявление ходатайств; изложение суду своего мнения по существу обвинения и его доказанности; выступление в судебных прениях. The relevance of research topic lies in the fact that the correct interpretation of procedural position of a defense attorney in court proceedings in the court of first instance is of no small importance in criminal proceedings. The article describes the degree of participation of defense attorney at the considered stage of criminal process: his research of evidence; application of petitions; presenting to the court his opinion on the merits of accusation and it's proof; speech in judicial pleadings.

scholarly journals Realization of the Purpose of Criminal Proceedings by the Investigator and by the Defense Counsel: Opposition or Interaction?

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-24
Author(s):  
Svetlana Bulatova
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Defense Counsel ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Independent Auditing ◽  
Case Based

The author discusses relationships between the prosecution and the defense during the preliminary investigation of a criminal case. Based on the analysis of contemporary Russian criminal procedure legislation and the links between the criminal procedure theory and criminalistics, the author concludes that it is necessary to single out the following forms of relationships between the defense counsel and the investigator: cooperation and counteraction to the investigation. The author, taking into account existing theoretical views, differentiates between these two concepts using the criterion of the legality of the actions of the sides. Correspondingly, it is suggested that cooperation is the activity of the sides carried out within the framework of the criminal procedure legislation and aimed at the realization of the purpose of criminal court proceedings as stated in Art. 6 of the Code of Criminal Proceedings of the Russian Federation. Using this as a basis, the author attempts to outline the procedural types of such interaction depending on the manner in which the defense counsel participates in proofing a criminal case. Firstly, there is a situation in which evidence is collected directly by the defense council. The author believes that in this case the investigator checks the evidence acting as an independent auditing body in the legal relationships and does not perform the function of the prosecution. Secondly, there is a procedural form of interaction when the defense counsel participates in the collection of evidence carried out by the side of the prosecution.

scholarly journals Court Discretion as Part of the Criminal Procedure Paradigm Structure

Legal Concept ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 166-173
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Azarova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Goals And Objectives

Introduction: the fundamental rights of citizens enshrined in the Constitution are accordingly reflected in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. For more than fifteen years of the Code of Criminal Procedure application, the legislator has made about three hundred amendments that have increased its ambiguity and inconsistency. The very construct of its provisions is being built and in progress without a planned scientific and theoretical component of such building, without taking into account the empiricism of application. The Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR was used as a constructive basis for the new law, where the stages of criminal process are the fundamental structure of the law. The presence and introduction of new types of judicial proceedings and related institutions as an additional “load” caused the “deflection” of the entire structure of the Criminal Procedure Code, the consequence of which was the increase of unceasing contradictions between the goals and objectives of criminal proceedings, its general conceptual provisions and the criminal process immediate stages. The author sets the purpose of the study, which consists in the justification of contradictions in the law. Methods: the methodological framework consists of the methods of historicism, systematicity, and comparative law. Results: grounded in the work the author’s point of view is based on the knowledge in criminal law. Conclusions: the study revealed that the court discretion is an integral part of the criminal procedure paradigm structure, as the perception by the court of the “truth” of the circumstances to be proved in a criminal case, interpreted by the opposite parties of the adversarial process, is only possible through the prism of assessing these circumstances by the court at its discretion, during the verification of evidence in a particular criminal case.

scholarly journals DISCUSSION ISSUES OF THE LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLES 314 AND 316 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 877-884
Author(s):  
N.O. Mashinnikova
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Absolute Number ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
State Process ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Simplified Procedures

In this article the author considers the simplified procedures of judicial proceedings from the point of view of their compliance with the basic principles of criminal proceedings, enshrined in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. The article concludes that the race for the economic efficiency of any state process affected the proceedings as well. This was the reason that justice, as a service, was reborn in the state service of justice, which in turn led to a decrease in its quality, which according to the author is expressed not so much in the absence of "cancellations" as in its non-compliance with the principles and purpose enshrined in the criminal procedure code. The author welcomes the initiative of the Plenum of the Supreme Court about the need to adopt measures to decrease the absolute number of criminal cases dealt with in simplified procedures, however, did not agree with the solution proposed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. In author’s opinion, the amendments proposed by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation violate the rights of the accused to defense and contradict Article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The author presents her own proposal to change the code of criminal procedure in this part with bringing the necessary justification to that.

scholarly journals Possibilities for the Use of Information Obtained by Using Information and Technical Means and Means of Operative-Search Activities in Other Criminal Matters

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-93
Author(s):  
Zuzana Kurucová
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Slovak Republic ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Application Problem ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Media ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Open Question

Abstract Information that were obtained legally using information and technical means and means of operative-search activities have the nature of evidence in criminal proceedings. The nature of evidence is granted directly to this information, not to the media where they are recorded. In the case of legal use, this information has the nature of evidence in the criminal case, but the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code in the Slovak Republic contribute significantly to the detection and proving of serious criminal offences, because such information can be indirectly used also in other criminal case. Problematic is the fact that the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic adopted differing positions precisely on these options of the use of evidence in other criminal case, this dispute was also joined by the Prosecutor's office and this application problem has not been resolved even by the unifying opinion at the level of the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic. There is therefore still an open question from the point of argumentation and application, what evidence can be used also in other criminal cases or under what conditions.

Evidencial Significance Evaluation of the Preinvestigation Check Materials by the Court

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 74-80
Author(s):  
M. S. Shalumov
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Points Of View

The article provides a comparative analysis of the previously existing criminal procedural rules and norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, which regulate the procedure for conducting pre-investigation checks, the possibility of conducting investigative and other procedural actions during such checks, their list and content, the grounds and procedure for the court to recognize the results of these actions as evidence for criminal the case, the points of view of various scholars are given, including the author himself, as well as the legal positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding the procedural statue of the explanations and other materials obtained during the preliminary investigation related to the assessment of the evidentiary value of the materials collected by the investigator, the preliminary investigator before the initiation of the criminal case, and presented as evidence in the course of the trial, the conditions are revealed under which these materials can be recognized as evidence in a criminal case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document