CONCERNING THE STRUCTURE OF PUBLIC LEGAL INTEREST IN CRIMINAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-30
Author(s):  
Алексей Викторович Дашин ◽  
Петр Михайлович Малин ◽  
Алексей Васильевич Пивень
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
Legitimate Interest ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Constituent Elements

В статье анализируется структура публичного законного интереса в уголовном судопроизводстве, входящих в него элементов на примере института домашнего ареста. Авторская модель публичного законного интереса участников уголовного процесса «привязана» к стадийности и может распространяться не только на вопросы, связанные с мерами пресечения. По мнению авторов, публичный законный интерес в контексте рассматриваемой проблемы воплощается в жизнь на основе нормативно установленного действия, содержащего конкретно сформулированные правила, устанавливающие четко определенные права и обязанности участников правоотношений. Данная деятельность сопряжена с определенными этапами (стадиями), которые в той или иной степени характерны соответствующей мере пресечения, и возможна в той стадии, где осуществляется оценка действий, предпринятых должностным лицом, осуществляющим производство по уголовному делу. Реализация публичного законного интереса, заявленного следователем, дознавателем на избрание домашнего ареста, зависит от того, как соответствующие устремления оценят другие должностные лица - руководитель следственного органа, прокурор (не обладающие правами реализации публичного законного интереса), то есть от их усмотрения. Законодатель не предоставляет следователю, дознавателю возможность «непосредственно» обратиться в суд - участнику процесса, наделенному правом реализовать их устремление на избрание меры пресечения. Подобные «преграды» не предусмотрены в законе для иных участников уголовного процесса, не наделенных публичной властью и стремящихся реализовать свой законный интерес. The article analyzes the structure of public legitimate interest in criminal proceedings, its constituent elements on the example of the institution of house arrest. The author's model of the public legitimate interest of participants in the criminal process is «tied» to the stage and can extend not only to issues related to preventive measures. According to the authors, public legitimate interest in the context of the problem under consideration is brought to life on the basis of a normatively established action containing specifically formulated rules establishing clearly defined rights and obligations of participants in legal relations. This activity is associated with certain phases (stages) that are more or less characteristic of the corresponding measure of restraint, and is possible at the stage where the actions taken by the official conducting the criminal proceedings are evaluated. The realization of the public legitimate interest declared by the investigator, the investigating officer for the election of house arrest depends on how the relevant intentions will be evaluated by other officials - the head of the investigative body, the prosecutor (who do not have the rights to realize the public legitimate interest), i.e. on their discretion. The legislator does not give the investigator, the inquirer the opportunity to turn «directly» to the court - a participant in the process, entitled to realize their intentions for the election of measures of restrain. Such «barriers» are not provided in the law for other participants in the criminal process who are not endowed with public authority and who seek to realize their legitimate interest.

scholarly journals TACTICAL COMPONENTS OF THE PROSECUTOR’S ACTIONS TO CONCLUDE A PLEA AGREEMENT FOR THE ACCUSED

2021 ◽  
pp. 243-257
Author(s):  
I. Kohutych
Keyword(s):  
Media Coverage ◽  
Situational Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Support Provision ◽  
Negotiation Tactics ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Effective Use ◽  
Constituent Elements

The article is devoted to the study of certain tactical aspects of the he prosecutor’s participation in the conclusion of an agreement on the confession of guilt by the accused. It is concluded that it is necessary to develop a system of forensic recommendations regarding the provision of this direction of the prosecutor’s activity in court proceedings. It is stated that the institution of criminal procedure has appeared in Ukraine based on agreements, that is, a mechanism with separate contractual (compromise) elements during the resolution of criminal legal conflicts, which belongs to the so-called special orders of criminal proceedings. It is noted that, in contrast to the sufficient attention of scientists to the issues of procedural regulation of criminal proceedings based on agreements, the tactical aspects of the activities of the prosecutor almost get out of sight of scientific research, which is in no way consistent with modern challenges of combating crime. It has been established that the activities of the prosecutor to conclude an agreement on the confession of guilt by the accused and his/her judicial approval are cognitive and organizationally diverse, requiring appropriate tactical support (provision). This support will be a new direction of tactical and forensic support of the so-called compromise procedures in criminal proceedings. It should contain recommendations, at least regarding localization of an unproductive conflict between the prosecution and the accused, as well as unpredictable compromises between other participants in criminal proceedings. It should contain recommendations the availability of adequate ways to convince the accused of the futility of his/her opposition to the prosecutor and the court and the need to cooperate with them based on feedback, taking into account the specifics of professional defense and a situational analysis of one or another variant of defense tactics. In the context of the prosecutor’s activities to conclude an agreement on the plea of the accused, the most relevant is the so-called negotiation tactics. In the mainstream of the analyzed subject, it would be more expedient to call it the tactics of prosecutorial persuasion and ensuring compromise procedures in the criminal process. Its constituent elements are a system of recommendations regarding the organizational, informational and resource-personnel support of the prosecutor’s activities to conclude an agreement on the plea of the accused in order to a) make it impossible for the relevant participants in the criminal process to formally treat their duties; b) prevent unpredictable compromises between the defense and the victim, as well as prosecution witnesses; c) promote exclusively objective media coverage of the real state of affairs (in conditions of journalistic interest in a specific compromise procedure). At least, this will already become the basis for the effective use of tactics of creating conditions for the preparation and direct conclusion of an agreement on the plea of the accused.

scholarly journals The Role of the Prosecutor in the Prevention and Elimination of Investigative Errors: Russian and German Experience

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 424-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holm Putzke ◽  
Aleksey Tarbagaev ◽  
Аleksandr Nazarov ◽  
Ludmila Maiorova
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Police Investigation ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Court Proceedings

The paper is devoted to the prevention, identification and correction of mistakes during the preliminary criminal investigation because establishing the offence and all the circumstances that constitute evidence forms the basis for a just verdict, helps prevent crimes against justice and reach other goals of punishment. The authors present the conceptual and normative background for the model of permanent prosecutors supervision as the dominant control and supervision activity in the pre-trial criminal proceedings that allows to effectively implement the strategies of criminal prosecution and protection of human rights. This model establishes the authority of the prosecutor for the procedural management of the criminal prosecution in the criminal process as a significant supervision authority. The tasks of identifying, correcting and preventing (not making) mistakes in pre-trial investigations are equally urgent in Russia and in Germany. Although the Criminal Procedure Code of Germany gives the prosecutors office the leading role in the investigation, in practice the investigation is more often carried out by the police while the role of the prosecutor is reduced to summarizing the results of the police investigation and making the final decisions. At the same time, the prosecutors office has considerable powers of discretion regarding the initiation or non-initiation of criminal prosecution, the prosecutor uses his/her own discretion to determine the procedure and method of investigation. It is important to examine some aspects of the prosecutors role in German criminal court proceedings within the framework of correcting investigation mistakes in Russian criminal process. The model of prosecutors supervision presented in the paper does not preclude the legislative provisions for the transfer of some authority of the court to the prosecutor at the pre-trial stages of the criminal process. This model of prosecutors supervision allows timely and effective identification, correction and prevention of investigation mistakes at the pre-trial stages of criminal court proceedings.

THE POSITION OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS – LEGAL ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (XXI) ◽  
pp. 97-114
Author(s):  
Michał Sędziński
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The aim of this article is to comprehensively analyse the legal position of the public prosecutor in administrative proceedings and administrative court proceedings. This subject is interesting because the public prosecutor is usually associated with criminal proceedings and his capacity as the public accuser. However, the public prosecutor plays a special role in administrative proceedings, i.e. participates in them as an entity with the rights of a party, even though he has no legal interest in it. It is also worth noting that the powers of the public prosecutor are clearly more extensive than those of other entities with the rights of a party. This article is an attempt to determine the role of the public prosecutor in administrative proceedings and decide whether he is the accuser or rather the representative of the public interest. The position of the public prosecutor in proceedings before administrative courts is special as well. This issue needs to be discussed in detail, which was taken into account in the second part of the article. The position of the public prosecutor as the advocate of the rule of law is regulated by the Act on the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The analysis of these provisions in conjunction with Chapter 4 of the Code of Administrative Procedure leads to a conclusion that the public prosecutor who acts in administrative proceedings as an entity with the rights of a party has powers vested in him alone and watches over such proceedings, thereby fulfilling the duties of an advocate of the rule of law. To fully show the special position of the public prosecutor, it is necessary to enumerate his powers in administrative proceedings and compare them with the competences of “ordinary” entities with the rights of a party.

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.

Expediting the ICC Criminal Process: Striking the Right Balance between the ICC and States Parties

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-425
Author(s):  
Hirad Abtahi ◽  
Shehzad Charania
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Common Goal ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Right

When establishing the ICC, the sole permanent international criminal court, States ensured that they would play a legislative role larger and more direct than the ad hoc and hybrid courts and tribunals. States Parties have, however, acknowledged that, given the time they spend interpreting and applying the ICC legal framework, the judges are uniquely placed to identify and propose measures designed to expedite the criminal process. Accordingly, the ICC has followed a dual track. First, it has pursued an amendment track, which requires States Parties’ direct approval of ICC proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Second, it has implemented practices changes that do not require State involvement. This interactive process between the Court and States Parties reflects their common goal to expedite the criminal proceedings. The future of this process will rely on striking the right equilibrium between the respective roles of States Parties and the Court.

Cassatieberoepen tegen criminele vonnissen en arresten in het Leiedepartement, 1796-1813

2020 ◽  
Vol 88 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 179-210
Author(s):  
J. Monballyu
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Prosecution Service

Summary In the department of the Lys, the cassation appeal against criminal judgments was introduced in 1796 and could be made by both the criminal convicts and the Public Prosecution Service. The first cassation appeal was lodged on 5 May 1796 and the last on 18 December 1813. In total, 187 (24%) of the 779 criminal judgments were appealed in cassation, in 172 cases by 319 criminal convicts and in 15 cases by the Public Prosecution Service. Of those 187 cassation appeals, 167 (89.3%) were rejected and 20 (10.7%) were accepted. In the latter cases, this led to the annulment of the contested judgment and, in most cases, the criminal proceedings were (partially) repeated for an equivalent, nearby criminal court.

scholarly journals Practical Application of the Provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure Regarding the Measure of Preventive Arrest

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-32
Author(s):  
Nicolae Silviu Pana ◽  
Ana Maria Pana
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
Procedure Code

Preventive measures are coercive criminal law enforcement institutions, aimed at the deprivation or restriction of individual liberty, by which the suspect or defendant is prevented from undertaking certain activities that would adversely affect the conduct of the criminal proceedings or the achievement of its purpose. They have been instituted by the legislator for specific purposes, namely: to ensure the proper conduct of criminal proceedings, to prevent the abstraction of the suspect or defendant from trial and to prevent the commission of new offenses (art. 202 para. 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code). Preventive measures are not inherent in any ongoing criminal trial, but are exceptional measures (art. 9 para. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code), and the court can decide to sease the measure or make use of the measure in the light of the specific circumstances of each case. Of the five preventive measures, three are deprivation of liberty - detention, house arrest and pre-trial detention, and two are non-custodial: judicial control and judicial control on bail. All these measures are only applicable to the natural person. Specific preventive measures may be taken against legal persons, but those are regulated by the provisions of art. 493 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

scholarly journals Some Questions Arising in the Trial of Civil Lawsuits in the Criminal Court of First Instance

2021 ◽  
pp. 33-41
Author(s):  
Nataliya Osodoeva
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Material Damage ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
Civil Process ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
Civil Lawsuits ◽  
Court Of First Instance ◽  
Court Hearing

The article discusses some problems of considering a civil claim during a criminal court hearing. It is argued that settling a civil claim during criminal proceedings has a higher priority than a trial in a civil process. The author justifies the position according to which filing a lawsuit during criminal proceedings is a right and not an obligation of a person in a criminal trial. The author also believes that in filing a civil claim in a criminal process, the civil plaintiff should present proof of the incurred costs with the purpose of further recovery of the material damage; besides, the person who will pay the damage or compensate for the moral harm should be established. Based on the analysis of court practice, it is proven that the settlement of a civil claim during a special procedure of a criminal court trial is possible, however, the accused should agree not only with the accusation, but also with the size of the damage (harm). The cases in which the courts can eliminate violations of criminal procedure legislation during preliminary investigations are examined.

scholarly journals A New System of Preventive Measures Alternative to Remand in Custody: First Results of Application, Development Prospects

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-255
Author(s):  
Lev Bertovskij ◽  
Aleksandr Kvyk
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Application Development ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
House Arrest ◽  
European Court ◽  
First Results

We currently witness a heightened interest for the humanization of penalization measures, specifically, preventive measures, both in the theory and practice of Russian criminal procedure. There is well-grounded criticism of the fact that the number of remands in custody used as preventive measures is high and that their terms are prolongated many times, and on similar grounds, both in the Russian criminal procedure sphere and in the European Court of Human Rights during the examination of specific complaints. The analyzed statistical information showed that in 2015, remand in custody as a preventive measure in the criminal cases of grave and especially grave crimes was used for every second suspect or accused. It could not but contribute to the development of a system of preventive measures alternative to detention, and to the emergence of its new types. The authors analyze changes in the strict hierarchical system of preventive measures in view of Federal Law № 72-ФЗ enacted on April 18, 2018, which changed the procedure of applying the preventing measures of house arrest and bail and provided a measure that is completely new for Russian criminal process - the prohibition of certain actions. A considerable variety of restrictive measures included in the prohibition of certain actions, and the possibility of applying them in combination with a bail created a situation paradoxical for Russian criminal process when the application of a measure of prohibition of certain actions, that is a milder one in the hierarchy of restrictive actions, may restrict the rights and liberties of a person to a greater degree than a bail, which is a stricter measure. Besides, the legislative definition of the essence of house arrest as complete isolation of a person from the society and the prohibition of certain actions as partial isolation has created a competition between these preventive measures when they are enforced in practice. The authors present convincing arguments to show that it is impossible to ensure complete isolation of a person form the society without placing that person in the pre-trial detention facility, which makes it possible to equal house arrest with a prohibition to leave a dwelling in a certain period within the framework of prohibiting certain actions. Although there are some questions regarding the application of preventive measures alternative to remand in custody, we should commend the efforts of lawmakers to develop a system of these measures, and the practice of their enforcement will certainly allow to eliminate the existing competition and solve specific problems of their selection and application.

scholarly journals Digital Information Platforms as an Object of Normative Legal Regulation in the Sphere of Criminal Proceedings

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 873-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viсtor Grigoryev ◽  
Alexander Sukhodolov ◽  
Sergey Ovanesyan ◽  
Marina Spasennikova ◽  
Vladislav Tyunkov
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
Road Map ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Definition Of

While noting the general trend for the regulation of digital relations in the sphere of criminal court proceedings, the authors draw attention to the absence of a common approach to this work, or of a universal understanding of criminal procedure norms regarding digital relations, as well as to the drawbacks in preparing new norms that regulate digital relations. Problems connected with the regulation of electronic processes are not specific for Russia only. Laws of some countries do not recognize evidence obtained electronically, and view it as secondary. The results of implementing the road map of digital economy and the approaches to the definition and typification of digital platforms are the basis for laying the foundations of the criminal proceedings’ digitization in Russia. Large-scale growth of innovations for the platforms and an increasing complexity of their architecture enable the solution of a new research task — the spread of digital platforms to various sectors, in this case, to the sphere of criminal proceedings. The authors use the definition of a digital platform approved by the Russian Governmental Commission on Digital Development to formulate their own definition of a digital information platform as an object of normative legal regulation in the sphere of criminal proceedings and prove that it should belong to sectoral digital platforms. The value of the transition to the normative legal regulation of digital information systems in the sphere of court proceedings lies in the reduction of costs and the elimination of the subjective factor by using a package of digital technologies of data processing and changing the system of the division of labor while reaching the purpose of criminal justice. The authors also stress the inappropriateness of simplification and primitivism, when a criminal procedure system is mechanically viewed as a system of distributed registers (blockchain), or when digitization is used as an excuse for suggesting the abolishment of investigative departments as parasites in the digital reality where crime investigation and solution become a job for ordinary internet users.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document