Features of the Legal Regulation of the Institute of Rehabilitation in the Criminal Procedure Code of the CIS Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 105-112
Author(s):  
O. A. Myadzelets ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Moral Damage ◽  
Compensation For Damage ◽  
Cis Countries ◽  
Near Abroad

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

Judicial Control and Prosecutorial Supervision in the System of Guarantees for Observing the Rights and Freedoms of a Suspect Person

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 792
Author(s):  
Talgat T. DYUSSEBAYEV ◽  
Aizhan A. AMANGELDY ◽  
Talgat T. BALASHOV ◽  
Ainur A. AKIMBAYEVA ◽  
Kuanysh ARATULY ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
Cis Countries ◽  
Special Studies

In the process of reforming the criminal procedure legislation, the institution of the prosecutor’s office has become one of its important aspects. The judiciary, being one of the independent and autonomous branches of power in criminal proceedings, which is a system of protecting the rights and freedoms of citizens, is by far the most effective structure for protecting human rights. The article reveals the essence of judicial control and prosecutorial supervision, identifies a number of problems in the form of potential threats to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of a suspect (accused) in this form of preliminary investigation. As a result of the study, the following was stated. The current provisions of the CIS constitutions regulating the sphere of human rights and freedoms have made it possible to single out separate independent areas in the activities of the prosecutor’s office. Based on the practical problems that arise in the conditions of the new Criminal Procedure Code in the CIS countries, the authors consider it reasonable that the current oversight functions assigned to the prosecution authorities in ensuring the rights and freedoms of a suspect and an accused during the investigation, necessitate further special studies with the aim of development of evidence-based proposals for their resolution.  

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 To the admissibility of the civil law exemption of property from arrest, imposed in the criminal proceedings: domestic and foreign experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-200
Author(s):  
Natalia Kashtanova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Protection

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

scholarly journals Grounds for Canceling Seizure in Pre-Trial Criminal Proceedings

2020 ◽  
pp. 228-233
Author(s):  
Boris B. Bulatov ◽  
◽  
Alexander S. Dezhnev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Private Interests ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Lawsuits ◽  
The Russian Federation

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

ON THE POSSIBILITIES OF INTEGRATING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INTO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 220-227
Author(s):  
ELENA PAPYSHEVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Formal Language ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Machine Readable

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

Basic principles of the prosecutor in criminal proceedings under Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ihor Rohatiuk
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Criminal Proceeding ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Times

Principles have always been the cornerstones of criminal proceedings’ legal regulation affecting all participants of criminal process. Taking into account the accelerated pace of current law enforcement reforming it is necessary to mention the prosecution institute and key role of criminal proceedings’ principles presenting scientific background for further empirical findings. The majority of these principles defines the priority growth directions of criminal process as well as creates friendly environment for behavioral aspects of criminal proceeding parties. This article provides comparative analysis of the existing criminal procedural principles of the prosecutor’s role in the criminal proceedings with specification of the legality principle as a requirement for all subjects of the criminal proceedings, including the prosecutor, to use the norms and provisions of legal acts correctly, to comply it consistently and perform accurately, explores the historical origins of these principles and their determinants’ origin starting from the times of Kievan Rus and its unique judicial system and proves that the adversarial principle is closely connected with dispositivity of prosecutor’s participation in criminal proceeding. An emphasis is placed on correlation between the ‘principles’ and ‘foundations’ terms examined by Ukrainian and Soviet scholars and its application in relation to the newly adopted Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

scholarly journals Compensation for Damage Caused by a Crime in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam and the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-220
Author(s):  
Nguyen Van Tien ◽  
Viktor Victorovich Pushkarev ◽  
Ekaterina Viktorovna Tokareva ◽  
Alexey Vasilyevich Makeev ◽  
Olga Rinatovna Shepeleva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Socialist Republic ◽  
Moral Damage ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage

In criminal proceedings of Vietnam, in contrast to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, it is advisable to separate physical, material and moral damage that may be caused by the crime or socially dangerous act prohibited by the criminal law, the rights and legitimate interests of natural or legal persons. The article is devoted to solving the problem of compensation for damage caused by a crime in pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases, based on the study of Russian and Vietnamese criminal procedure legislation, practice, and results of its application. The conclusions are subject to study and implementation in the law.Keywords: Compensation for harm; Investigation; Rights and legitimate interests of participants in criminal proceedings Kompensasi untuk Kerusakan yang Disebabkan oleh Kejahatan di Republik Sosialis Vietnam dan Federasi Rusia Abstrak:Berbeda dengan Kode Acara Pidana Federasi Rusia, lebih baik dalam proses pidana Vietnam untuk memisahkan kerugian fisik, material, dan moral yang disebabkan oleh kejahatan atau tindakan berbahaya secara sosial yang dilarang oleh hukum pidana dari hak dan kepentingan sah orang atau badan hukum. Berdasarkan kajian undang-undang prosedur pidana Rusia dan Vietnam, praktik, dan hasil penerapannya, artikel ini dikhususkan untuk memecahkan masalah kompensasi atas kerusakan yang disebabkan oleh kejahatan dalam proses pra-persidangan dalam kasus pidana. Kesimpulan sedang dipelajari dan akan dimasukkan ke dalam undang-undang.Kata Kunci: Kompensasi untuk kerugian; Penyelidikan; Hak dan kepentingan sah peserta dalam proses pidana Возмещение вреда причиненного преступлением в социалистической республике Вьетнам и Российской Федерации АннотацияСтатья посвящена разрешению проблемы возмещения вреда, причиненного преступлением, в досудебном производстве по уголовным делам, на основе исследования российского и вьетнамского уголовно-процессуального законодательства, практики и результатов его применения. Выводы подлежат изучению и внедрению в законКлючевые Слова: возмещение вреда, расследование, права и законные интересы участников уголовного процесса, следователь, дознаватель

scholarly journals On the problem of establishing a condition for compensation for damage and making amends for damage when a criminal case (criminal prosecution) is terminated in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 129-134
Author(s):  
I.V. Fatyanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage

The article examines the ambiguity in the interpretation of article 76.2 of the Criminal code and article 25.1 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation to establish terms of compensation for the damage and (or) smoothing caused by the crime harm. The author substantiates the argument about the fallacy of considering this condition only formally, the author focuses on the mandatory establishment in this case of the characteristics of the identity of the guilty person and the measure of public danger of the committed act. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the approach proposed by the author to the study of the problem of establishing such a condition. In particular, the author considers it essential to solve such a problem to study the legal nature of compensation for damage and compensation for damage when a criminal case (criminal prosecution) is terminated on this basis. The author defines the specifics, identifies the main purposes of such a legal phenomenon in the context of a legal problem. The article concludes that if the preliminary investigation body and (or) the court (justice of the peace) the lack of property harmful consequences from the crime, the failure to make reparation is not to be considered as an obstacle to the termination of criminal proceedings on the grounds provided by article 25.1 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation, article 76.2 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. As a conclusion, the scientific work has prepared a specific text of the interpretation of the condition in the relevant explanations of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which will exclude ambiguity on this issue from the law enforcement officer.

scholarly journals Criminal Procedure Code of Russia: Twenty Years Later (2001–2021)

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-188
Author(s):  
Oksana V. Kachalova ◽  
◽  
Viktor I. Kachalov
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

Introduction. 2021 marks the 20th anniversary of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, adopted by the State Duma on November 22, 2001 by Federal Law No. 174-FZ. The development of criminal procedure legislation in these years was not always consistent, often characterized by chaotic and hasty measures. Nevertheless, the main factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, as well as the key trends in the legal regulation of criminal procedure legal relations, have remained fairly stable for twenty years. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The object of the study is the norms of criminal procedure law that have emerged and developed during the period of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation since 2001. The methodological basis of the study is the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which allowed us to study the subject of the study in relation to other legal phenomena, as well as general scientific methods of knowledge (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, analogy, and modelling) and private scientific methods of knowledge (formal legal, historical-legal, and comparative-legal). Results. Among the variety of various factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, there are several main ones: 1. The impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal proceedings. Having ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights and Freedoms in 1998, Russia voluntarily assumed obligations in the field of ensuring citizens rights and freedoms, as well as creating the necessary conditions for their implementation. Among the most important criminal procedure norms and institutions that have emerged in the system of criminal procedure regulation under the influence of the positions of the ECHR, the following are notable: a reasonable period of criminal proceedings, the rights of participants in the verification of a crime report, the disclosure of the testimony of an absent witness at a court session, and alternative preventive measures to detention. 2. Optimisation of procedural resources and improvement of the efficiency of criminal proceedings. From the very beginning of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, there was a special procedure for judicial proceedings, which is a simplified form of consideration of criminal cases, provided for in Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In 2009, this procedure was extended to cases with concluded pre-trial cooperation agreements (Chapter 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation), and in 2013, the institute of abbreviated inquiry appeared in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (Chapter 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). 3. Social demand for increasing the independence of the court, and the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings. Society’s needs to improve the independence of judges, increase public confidence in the court, transparency and quality of justice led to the reform of the jury court in 2016 (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 190-FZ). As a result of the reform, the court with the participation of jurors began to function at the level of district courts, the jurisdiction of criminal cases for jurors was expanded, the number of jurors was reduced from 12 to 8 in regional courts and 6 in district courts. However, practice has shown that sentences handed down by a court on the basis of a verdict rendered by a jury are overturned by higher courts much more often than others due to committed violations, which are associated, among other things, with the inability to ensure the objectivity of jurors. In the context of a request for an independent court, Article 81 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on the independence of judges (Federal Law of 2 July 2013 N 166-FZ) was adopted. 4. Reducing the degree of criminal repression. In the context of this trend, institutions have emerged in the criminal and criminal procedure laws that regulate new types of exemption from criminal liability. In 2011, Article 281 “Termination of criminal prosecution in connection with compensation for damage” was adopted, concerning a number of criminal cases on tax and other economic crimes (Federal Law of 7 December 2011 N 420). In 2016, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation introduced rules on the termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine (Federal Law of 3 July 2016 N 323-FZ). 5. Digitalisation of modern society. The rapid development of information technologies and their implementation in all spheres of public life has put on the agenda the question of adapting a rather archaic “paper” criminal process to the needs of today, and the possibilities of using modern information technologies in the process of criminal proceedings. Among the innovations in this area, it should be noted the appearance in the criminal procedure law of Article 1861 “Obtaining information about connections between subscribers and (or) subscriber devices” (Federal Law of 1 July 2010 N 143-FZ), Article 4741 “The procedure for using electronic documents in criminal proceedings” (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 220-FZ), the legal regulation of video-conferencing in criminal proceedings (Federal Law of 20 March 2011 N 39-FZ), and the introduction of audio recording of court sessions (Federal Law of 29 July 2018-FZ N 228-FZ), etс. Currently, the possibilities of further digitalisation of criminal proceedings, and the use of programs based on artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings, ets. are being actively discussed. Discussion and Conclusion. The main factors determining the vector of development of modern criminal justice should, in our opinion, include the impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal justice; optimisation of procedural resources and the need to improve the efficiency of criminal justice, social demands for strengthening the independence of the court, adversarial criminal proceedings; the needs of society to reduce the degree of criminal repression, and digitalisation of modern society.

scholarly journals Problems of legal regulation of the stage of exciting a criminal case

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 116-120
Author(s):  
M.A. Mityukova ◽  
◽  
N.A. Shishkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation

The lack of sufficient legal regulation of criminal procedural activity at the stage of initiating a criminal case causes the constant appeal of theorists and practitioners to the study of this stage. At the same time, the legislator has not yet made the necessary changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. This study analyzes the methods of verifying reports of a crime, in particular, the problems of proper process fixing of received objects and documents when using such methods of collecting evidence as reclamation and presentation. Based on the analysis of theoretical provisions and investigative practice, problems are posed and conclusions are drawn about the need to fix the possibility of seizure in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation when checking a crime report. The issues of the legal status of participants in the stage of initiating a criminal case at the stage of receiving and registering reports of a crime, during the production of investigative actions are also studied. Conclusions are drawn about the need to make changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation aimed at consolidating the legal status of the applicant, the victim, eyewitnesses and other participants in criminal proceedings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document