scholarly journals Duty of Proving of a Civil Suit in Criminal Proceedings

2019 ◽  
pp. 137-144
Author(s):  
Serhii Krushynskyi

The article is devoted to the analysis of some problematic questions related to the duty of proving of civil suit in criminal proceedings in Ukraine. In the criminal procedure doctrine there is no unanimous opinion of which subjects are required to engage into proving activities aimed at detection of civil suit circumstances in criminal proceedings. Concepts «duty of proving» and «burden of proving» are delineated by author. The position that the burden of proving is determined by the interests of participants in criminal proceedings was supported. The content of the burden of proving of civil suit in criminal proceedings covers the need to representation of evidence to justify (or refute) the amount of property damage, the depth of the suffering, and the amount of property compensation for non-pecuniary damage. The material and procedural interest of the civil plaintiff and the civil defendant in the outcome of the criminal proceedings encourages them to take an active part in the criminal procedural proving, in particular by representation of evidence available to them. The publicity (officiality) of criminal proceedings causes differences in the procedure for proving the grounds and size of a civil suit in criminal proceedings compared to civil proceedings. It is concluded that the duty of proving of civil suit circumstances lies on the prosecution party (investigator, prosecutor). The civil plaintiff, the civil defendant, their representatives are complete subjects of proving, but their activity in proving is a right, but not a duty. For the successful performance of their procedural functions, the defense of their legitimate interests, these persons are empowered to represent evidence, to participate in their research. So, they are given the opportunity to contribute to the correct resolution of criminal proceedings, in particular in the civil suit part. The subjects involved in the criminal proceedings who have a duty of proving should provide a possibility of realization of the right to represent evidence by other participants in the process.

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 1102-1115
Author(s):  
Botirjon Khayitbayevich Ruzmetov

In this article author had searched the questions devoted the protection of human rights in the criminal procedure legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan and comparing with the legislation and worldwide experience of the foreign states.The article reveals the ongoing liberalization of the criminal law policy in the Republic of Uzbekistan, which is aimed at expanding human and fair norms, strengthening the protection of the rights, legitimate interests of a person andsociety. Against this background, the significance of investigative actions and the theory of evidence in the country's criminal procedural legislation is being revised. The development of science and technology leads to the improvement of methods of committing crimes using computer technology, taking into account which the timely disclosure and effective investigation of socially dangerous acts requires extensive use of mathematical tools and computer technologies.In this regard, changes are taking place in the investigative practice aimed at increasing knowledge in the field of computer technologies among law enforcement officials and increasing the responsibility of the personal of the investigative and judicial authorities in the implementation of their activities.The author emphasizes that despite significant restrictions on the rights and legitimate interests of a person in the conduct of investigative actions, all of them are necessary for obtaining sufficient evidence to expose the guilt of the offender, in the manner prescribed by law.Compliance by investigators, prosecutors and judges of all criminal procedural requirements established by the legislation of the country is a key requirement for the recognition of evidence as lawful and sufficient for a fair sentence.It should be noted that the article highlights that, since 1994, the Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan enshrines the right to defense by involving a lawyer in the case from the moment a person is detained on suspicion of committing a crime, as well as the principle of equality of arms in criminal proceedings. An addition to the liberalization of legislation is the fact that now the courts are freed from such unusual functions as the execution of court decisions.In addition, the article expands on the author's proposals for improving the legislation of Uzbekistan, as well as expanding the power of lawyers, especially in the conduct of investigative actions, aimed at expanding the process of liberalization of criminal law in the country and improving the situation with the protection of human rights in the investigation of criminal cases.


Author(s):  
V. V. Muryleva-Kazak

The article discusses the issue of the legal nature of the right to compensate harm, the effectiveness of usage of the criminal procedure mechanism for its protection and the reasonableness of the inclusion of relevant in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.Based on the analysis of judicial practice, it is concluded that the courts have difficulties in determining the appropriate way to protect the right to compensate harm caused in the course of criminal proceedings and the delineation of competence between arbitration courts and courts of general jurisdiction, which leads to a violation of the applicants’ right to access to justice and reduces the effectiveness of judicial protection.In addition, it is concluded that the criminal procedure form is not adapted to the consideration of civil disputes on compensation for harm, the author names the impossibility of collecting lost profits as one of the factors that reduce the effectiveness of the use of the criminal procedural mechanism for protecting property rights.Based on the interpretation of the criminal procedure rules provided in the article, the author concludes that legal entities have an opportunity to use criminal procedure remedies for violated property rights in more cases than individuals, which violates the principle of equality before the law and the court. The article provides ways to solve the identified problems.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 144-155
Author(s):  
V. A. Kovalenko

The paper examines the types of harm provided for by domestic legislation, their procedural features in a criminal case by filing a civil claim. The author argues that there is a need to amend the existing normative legal acts regulating the issues of compensation for harm caused by a crime, in particular, presents some arguments about the disclosure and legislative consolidation of the concept of “harm” in the framework of criminal proceedings. The author analyzes the gaps associated with compensation for property damage, in terms of the difficult simultaneous compensation for property and moral damage, as well as the lack of opportunity in the criminal procedure to recover lost profits. Some features of compensation for moral damage in relation to individuals and legal entities are investigated, for example, the issue of applying the rules for compensation for moral damage when a civil claim is filed by a legal entity. The process of proving the damage caused and the gaps in the issues of awarding compensation amounts in civil claims for compensation for damage, taking into account judicial practice, are considered. The author expresses her opinion on the matter of interim measures application in relation to the property of tortfeasor and imposing on the judge the obligation to render a decision in case of such a need, and not the right. Some differences between a civil claim for damages in criminal proceedings and civil proceedings are given, for example, the possibility of indexing the amounts subject to compensation has been analyzed. The analysis of some regulatory acts and the study of the procedure for compensation for harm caused by a crime in the UK. The author presents an argument about the development of scientifically grounded methodological recommendations that would fully reveal the existing gaps and problems in compensation for various kinds of harm caused by a crime.


Author(s):  
I.О. Merimerina

The article is devoted to clarifying what the stage of an appeal in criminal proceedings is. During the investigation, the decisions of the investigating judge concerning the application of measures to ensure criminal proceedings are con-sidered to be appealed in accordance with the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. It was empha-sized that appealing the decisions of the investigating judge during the pre-trial investigation is an important guarantee of ensuring the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of the participants in the criminal proceedings. The list of persons who have the right to file an appeal is covered. The normative regulation of appealing against the decisions of the investigating judge is analyzed. The problematic issues of this activity and the definition of ways of normative regulation are considered. In the course of the research the works of scientists on the outlined issues are analyzed.The article examines the role of the prosecutor in verifying the legality and validity of decisions made by the investigating judge on the election, change, cancellation of measures to ensure criminal proceedings. Attention is drawn to the peculiarities of the prosecutor’s appeal of certain precautionary measures. Emphasis is placed on the peculiarities of the prosecutor’s filing of appeals, the quality of preparation of response documents. The peculiarities of appealing the decision of the appellate court, ruled on the results of the review of the decision of the investigating judge on the application of certain precautionary measures, have been studied. The characteristic features of appealing certain measures to ensure criminal proceedings have been identified and investigated.It is concluded that it is expedient to supplement the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine with provisions on the possibility for the prosecutor to appeal the decisions of the investigating judge on seizure of property, refusal, full or partial revocation of seizure of property, revocation of seizure of property, return of temporarily seized items and documents. measures in the form of a personal obligation or refusal to apply it, application of a precautionary measure in the form of a personal guarantee, application of a measure of restraint in the form of transfer of a juvenile suspect or accused under the supervision of parents, guardians, trustees or administration of a child care institution.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-121

As of 2020, 70 years have passed since the day of the adoption of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), which Ukraine ratified in September 1997. It was from this date that the countdown to significant democratic transformations in Ukraine and the establishment of human and civil rights and freedoms began. In this article, the authors raise relevant issues of reforming the criminal process of Ukraine in the context of European standards. The old Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine was adopted in 1960 and was in force for almost half a century. During this time, it became obsolete and bore a significant imprint of the Soviet past, which was manifest in both the bodies that conducted the trial and had primarily repressive powers and the public interests that dominated the rights and legitimate interests of those involved in criminal justice. The conditions under which the first steps aimed at realising the importance of the Convention and the value of human rights enshrined in it took place were not easy. The path of reform processes in criminal proceedings was associated with the confrontation of the Soviet past with modern transformation. It was difficult to realise the need to harmonise national legislation with European standards of human rights and freedoms and consolidate their perception as one of the necessary conditions for Ukraine’s integration into the European legal space, as well as the need for a conceptually new worldview for both the people of Ukraine and law enforcement bodies – officers, judges, and prosecutors. The authors summarise the most important decisions of the ECtHR made on complaints against Ukraine during the period of the reform of criminal procedure legislation, analyse the problems identified by the ECtHR, and illustrate how the legislator implemented the ECtHR standards in national criminal procedure legislation. They note that on the basis of the Convention and the case-law of the ECtHR in criminal procedure legislation, important principles of criminal proceedings, such as adversarial proceedings, direct examination of evidence, the right to defence, the right not to testify against oneself and close relatives, and reasonable time are legitimised. For the first time, the legislation of Ukraine has enshrined a rule on the inadmissibility of evidence obtained as a result of a significant violation of human rights and freedoms. A separate segment of the article is devoted to the consideration of amendments to the criminal procedure legislation regarding the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of a person in respect of whom a measure of restraint in the form of custody is chosen. In order to ensure the right of a person to liberty and security, the position of an investigating judge and the institute of free legal aid have been introduced. In addition, the authors focus on the aspects of direct application of the Convention and ECtHR decisions in law enforcement practice without amending the legislation, as well as analyse the legislative perspectives arising from non-implemented ECtHR decisions. Keywords: European convention; human rights; criminal procedure; principles of criminal procedure; Ukraine; freedom from self-disclosure; the right not to testify against close relatives and family members; the right to defence.


Author(s):  
Яна Валерьевна Самиулина

В настоящей статье предпринята попытка исследовать отдельные проблемные аспекты института потерпевшего в российском уголовном процессе. В этих целях подвергнуты анализу правовые нормы, регламентирующие его процессуальный статус. Раскрываются отдельные пробелы уголовно-процессуального законодательства в сфере защиты законных прав и интересов потерпевшего. Автор акцентирует внимание на том, что совершенствование уголовно-процессуального законодательства в части расширения правомочий потерпевшего по отстаиванию своих нарушенных преступлением прав следует продолжить. На основании проведенного исследования действующего законодательства в части регламентации прав потерпевшего от преступления предлагается расширить перечень получаемых им копий постановлений, указанных в п. 13 ч. 2 ст. 42 УПК РФ. Автор предлагает включить в перечень указанной законодательной нормы право получения потерпевшим копии постановления об избрании конкретного вида меры пресечения, избранного в отношении подозреваемого (обвиняемого). Для создания действенного механизма защиты интересов потерпевших от преступления юридических лиц предлагаем ч. 9 ст. 42 УПК РФ изложить в следующей редакции: «в случае признания потерпевшим юридического лица его процессуальное право в уголовном процессе осуществляет представляющий его профессиональный адвокат». This article attempts to investigate certain problematic aspects of the institution of the victim in the Russian criminal process. For this purpose, analyzed the individual norms governing his procedural status. Separate gaps of the criminal procedure legislation in the sphere of protection of the legal rights and interests of the victim are disclosed. The author emphasizes that the improvement of the criminal procedure legislation in terms of the extension of the victim’s authority to defend his rights violated by the crime should be continued. On the basis of the study of the current legislation regarding the regulation of the rights of the victim of a crime, it is proposed to expand the list of decisions received by him, referred to in paragraph 13, part 2 of article 42 Code of Criminal Procedure. The author proposes to include in the list of the indicated legislative norm the right to receive the victim a copy of the decision on the selection of a specific type of preventive measure, selected in relation to the suspect (accused). To create an effective mechanism for protecting the interests of legal entities victims of a crime, we offer part 9 of art. 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation shall be reworded as follows: «if a legal entity is recognized as a victim, his procedural right in criminal proceedings is exercised by the professional lawyer representing him».


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-319
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

Although EU states use the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for the purpose of surrendering a person who is accused of committing an offence or who has been convicted of an offence, they use extradition when dealing with countries outside the EU. However, they use surrender when dealing with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Thus, extradition is one of the ways in which African and European countries (especially EU members) are cooperating in the fight against crime. Case law from courts in some African and European countries and from the European Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture, shows that extraditions between African and European countries have been delayed or hampered by allegations of human rights violations in the requesting state. These allegations have focused on mainly two rights: the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom from torture. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the extradition of a person should not go ahead if his or her trial was or will amount to a flagrant denial of justice or where there is a real risk of being subjected to torture. Although African courts and international human rights bodies have also held that extradition should not go ahead where there is a real risk that the person will be subjected to torture or where his/her trial will be unfair, they have not adopted the ‘flagrant denial of justice’ test. The case law also shows that some people have challenged the legal basis for their extradition. This article highlights this case law and suggests ways in which some of the challenges associated with extradition could be overcome. The article demonstrates that courts in some African and European countries have considered the nature of extradition enquiries. In some countries, such as Kenya, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings. However, in the United Kingdom, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings of a special type. There is consensus that extradition enquiries are not civil proceedings.


2021 ◽  
pp. 198-213
Author(s):  
Lech Jaworski

Journalistic secrecy is professional. In the light of Article 15 of the Press Law (Pr.L.) the journalist is obliged to keep secret the identity of his informants and the authors of the press material, the mail to the editorial office or other material of this nature, if they deserve the right to remain anonymmous. This obligation also applies to other persons employed in editorial offices, press publishing houses and other press organizational units. In addition, it covers any information, the disclosure of which could violate the legitimate interests of third parties. This corresponds to the content of Article 12 § 1 (2) Pr.L., according to which a journalist is obliged to protect the personal rights and interests of informants acting in good faith and other people who trust him or her. Breaking journalistic secrecy is a crime prosecuted ex officio. However, in certain situations journalistic secrecy is excluded (Article 16 Pr.L. and Article 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 147-150
Author(s):  
Iryna Hloviuk ◽  

Current period of development of the legal system of Ukraine is characterized by variability of legislation that regulates, in particular, organization of judicial system and implementation of criminal proceedings. Unfortunately, criminal procedure legislation is no exception, given how many changes and additions have been made to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine since its entry into force in 2020. Undoubtedly, like any other codified legal act, CPC of Ukraine in modern conditions cannot be unchanged, given the dynamics of public relations, the provisions of international law, decisions of ECtHR and number of attempts to solve identified problems of its application. Difficulties of criminal procedural law enforcement are manifested in such an area as the use of discretion of authorities in criminal proceedings, although without it application of legislation is ineffective. At the same time, lawful discretion in criminal proceedings should not turn into its opposite � arbitrariness, which will already violate rights and legitimate interests of individuals and legal entities. In criminal proceedings, given the imperative method of legal regulation and possibility of various coercive measures, including those related to the restriction of constitutional human rights, this issue is of particular importance, given, inter alia, that prosecution�s discretion applies within non-adversarial procedure, and the CPC of Ukraine does not always provide for the possibility of appealing such decisions in court. The peer-reviewed monograph consists of four chapters, which contain 10 sections. Structuring of the monograph is logical; the author analyse problems of discretion from questions of concept, signs and limits of discretion, and then moves to the characteristic of realization of discretion by judge, prosecutor, investigator, detective. In general, without a doubt, the monograph of Torbas O. O. �Discretion in the criminal process of Ukraine: theoretical justification and practice of implementation� is relevant, complete and fundamental scientific work, has scientific and practical value. Monograph of Torbas O.O. significantly enriches criminal procedure doctrine regarding the subjects of criminal proceedings, criminal procedure decisions and other areas.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 792
Author(s):  
Talgat T. DYUSSEBAYEV ◽  
Aizhan A. AMANGELDY ◽  
Talgat T. BALASHOV ◽  
Ainur A. AKIMBAYEVA ◽  
Kuanysh ARATULY ◽  
...  

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.  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document