scholarly journals Some Issues Related to the Implementation of the Right to Protection by Individuals in Respect of Whom Criminal Proceedings Are Carried Out to Prove Them Guilty of Committing a Crime

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 396-404
Author(s):  
OL’GA P. ALEKSANDROVA ◽  
LYUDMILA YU. BUDANOVA

Introduction: the article deals with the issues of protection of the rights and freedoms of persons against whom criminal proceedings are carried out to prove them guilty of committing a crime; these issues have always been in the focus of attention of the progressive world community and the legislator. Aims: to analyze the legislation and law enforcement practice of Russia and some other countries in the field of the implementation of the right to protection by persons against whom criminal procedural activities are carried out to prove them guilty of committing a crime, to identify problem issues of a legal nature in this field, and to formulate scientifically substantiated recommendations to address them (minimization). Methods: the dialectical method of scientific knowledge forms the methodological basis of our study. We also use the following methods of scientific cognition: systematic, formal-logical, comparative-legal, etc. Results: the practice of ensuring the right to protection from suspicion or charge, including the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, shows that not all issues of legal regulation in this area have been resolved to a degree that satisfies science and practice; human rights established by international legal standards are still being violated, the principle of adversarial parties in criminal proceedings is not implemented to the fullest extent, especially in pre-trial proceedings. Discussion: currently, the following issues are debatable: about the possibility of participation of the defender before an official suspicion or charge is brought against the person in an initiated criminal case (from the moment of the beginning of the implementation of procedural actions against a person, aimed at verifying the report of a crime and the involvement of the person in the commission of this crime, before the initiation of a criminal case, as well as from the moment of the implementation of a procedural action in an initiated criminal case affecting the rights and freedoms of the person against whom it is being carried out, and aimed at proving them guilty of committing the crime); about the possible participation of another person as a defender upon the request of the defendant, as well as the scope of the requirements such persons should comply with, and a set of criteria, according to which a decision should be made to allow the individual who does not have the status of defense attorney to act as a defender. Conclusions: based on the results of the study, we formulate proposals for improving the criminal procedure legislation aimed at expanding the scope of possible participation of a defender in criminal proceedings at the stage before the official suspicion or charge is brought, and determining the procedure for considering applications for allowing other persons who do not have the status of defense attorney to act as a defender. Keywords: Criminal prosecution; defender; defense attorney; petition

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
Ya. M. Ploshkina ◽  
L. V. Mayorova

The paper considers the second attempt made by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in terms of introducing the concept of criminal misconduct into the Russian criminal and criminal procedure legislation, examines the goals of its introduction. The authors conclude that the introduction of a criminal offense in the draft law No. 1112019-7 will entail the need to review some approaches in Russian law: the legal nature of the crime, the ratio of a criminal offense with a minor act and an administrative offense, the elements of a crime with administrative prejudice, the principle of justice. It seems possible to achieve procedural effectiveness, reduce the burden on judges and protect the rights of victims without introducing a criminal offense within the existing criminal and criminal procedural mechanisms related to exemption from criminal liability and expansion of non-rehabilitating grounds for termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution. It seems possible to use the already established categorization of crimes in relation to crimes of small and medium gravity. In terms of expanding the grounds for terminating a criminal case or criminal prosecution, it is appropriate to use the experience of the German legislator, which provides for the possibility of terminating criminal prosecution on grounds of expediency when the accused fulfills various duties and regulations assigned to him. In German criminal procedure law, the termination of criminal prosecution on grounds of expediency when assigning duties or prescriptions to the accused is the right of the relevant officials and bodies, and not their obligation, since in fact it is an alternative to criminal prosecution. This will allow it to be terminated at a certain stage in the case when there are all legal grounds for criminal prosecution.


Author(s):  
V. Kantsir ◽  
V. Kushpit ◽  
A. Palyukh ◽  
I. Tsylyuryk ◽  
I. Kantsir

Abstract. The article is devoted to analysis of the effectiveness of the main procedural legal and financial (banking) mechanisms designed to ensure the protection of property rights’ immunity. The legally regulated procedures of such protection are analyzed on platforms — both procedural and legal as well as financial and economic. There is no doubt that only in a state where the immunity of property is declared and guaranteed to the person can be provided the development of economic, intellectual, socially oriented activities. The effect of the principle of immunity of property rights is not absolute, but its restrictions are possible only on the grounds and in the manner prescribed by law. The topicality of the inviolability of property rights is due to the role of law as a platform for citizens’ property independence and their participation in the processes of social reproduction. The guarantee of property independence is the right of ownership of property and non-property rights, which is realized by giving a person the right to freely, unimpededly, and fully exercise the rights of the owner of personal property. The compliance of the inviolability of property rights during criminal proceedings is not properly ensured in the current CPC (The Criminal Procedure Code) of Ukraine; in particular, the movement of confiscated property is not regulated, which questions the novelty of inviolability. To improve the procedure for the protection of property rights, this is necessary to regulate at the legislative level the mechanism of protection and restoration of property rights of persons victimized by criminal offenses. The etymology of «inviolability» guarantees by law the protection of the status of the person from any encroachment. Inviolability in the economic and legal context is mainly understood as a person’s legal status, which is an unalterable guarantee against unauthorized restrictions by the state institutions — law enforcement, financial, court, and individuals and legal entities. An attempt is made to accumulate most of the latest achievements (both legislative, theoretically investigative and applied) on the issues of legal regulation of the studied financial and legal relations, based on which scientific views are substantiated, and proposals are developed to improve regulations in this area. The main vectors of economic and legal mechanisms for the protection of the inviolability of property rights, which would correlate with generally accepted European and world standards, have been identified. Keywords: the inviolability of property rights, property rights, principles of proceedings, judicial protection, seizure of property, financial guarantee, financial risks. JEL Classification G28; К14 Formulas: 0; fig.: 0; tabl.: 0; bibl.: 12.


2019 ◽  
Vol 72 (7) ◽  
pp. 1337-1342
Author(s):  
Yuliya Nazarko ◽  
Oleksandr Iliashko ◽  
Natalіa Kaminska

Introduction: The right to health is exercised through a complex system of state and social measures of legal, economic, social, scientific, cultural, educational, organizational, technical, sanitary and hygienic nature, aimed at preserving and improving the health of people , lengthening the life expectancy and working capacity, creating good living and working conditions, providing physical and mental development for children and young people, and preventing and managing illnesses and their treatment. The aim: Investigate the international legal and constitutional legal regulation of the right to health care in the countries of the European Union. Materials and methods: The article analyzes the Constitution of the European Union, a number of international legal acts and judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Review: Each country defines the conditions for realizing the right to health care, according to which people should be healthy, the state itself assumes the obligations of the controller and the protection of this right. These provisions should primarily be enshrined in the Basic Laws - the constitutions. The main direction of state policy in reforming social relations is the achievement of European international legal standards in all spheres of public life. These standards fix the principles, guarantees of norms that determine the scope of human rights, in particular the right to health care. Conclusions: The main problem of ensuring and realizing the right to health in the European Union, as in many countries, is the financing of this industry, because in general, it is impossible to talk about free medical care in the European Union. There are also problems in the field of investment in health care. The urgent issues of primary health care and public health and the elderly dependence period.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 479-486
Author(s):  
Marija V. Mendzhul ◽  
Andrianna Yu. Badyda ◽  
Yuliia I. Fetko ◽  
Roman M. Fridmanskyy ◽  
Viktoriia I. Fridmanska

The article is devoted to a comparative legal study of the legalization of euthanasia in European countries and Ukraine. The authors have investigated the changes in the ECHR positions in the consideration of cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide. We concluded that the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights include an attempt to guarantee a balance in the right to choose the moment of death and the rights that are protected by 2 and 8 of the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The ECHR practice has been found to also influence the legalization of euthanasia in European states. Analysis of the laws of several European states in the context of legalizing the institution of euthanasia allowed us to group them as follows: European states that have legalized euthanasia (Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Spain); European states that have legalized only passive euthanasia (Great Britain, Ireland, Latvia, Norway, Slovak Republic, Finland, Sweden, and Hungary); and European states that prohibit any kind of euthanasia (France, Poland, Romania, etc.).


Author(s):  
Oksana Pchelina

It has been noted that such activities are a sphere of public life, which is inextricably linked with the need and possibility of coercion, which clearly indicates the restriction of certain human rights and freedoms to ensure the effectiveness of pre-trial investigation and trial. The provisions of international legal acts proclaiming and ensuring human rights and fundamental freedoms in criminal proceedings have been analyzed. It has been emphasized that in the specified international legal acts there is no interpretation of the right to information, and also it is not considered as the separate right. The essence of the right to information and its place in the system of human rights and freedoms has been determined. The author’s understanding of the concept of the right to information in criminal proceedings has been offered, its content has been revealed and its compliance with international standards of human rights and freedoms has been clarified. The right to information in criminal proceedings has been defined as the possibility and procedure for obtaining, using, disseminating, storing and protecting information provided by the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine, which determines the principles of criminal proceedings and ensures the solution of its tasks. It has been emphasized that the right to information in criminal proceedings in the context of international legal standards is multifaceted in nature, which allows us to consider it in several aspects, namely as: the basis of criminal proceedings; providing information on procedural rights; informing the person about his / her detention, suspicion / accusation of committing a criminal offense; gaining access to information on material evidence; a ban on the disclosure of information obtained during the pre-trial investigation and court proceedings, and its use not to solve the problems of criminal proceedings.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (7) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Елена Сопнева ◽  
Elena Sopneva

The author analyzes legislative, theoretical and practical levels of suspicion and charge enforcement. The author identifies problems of understanding the concepts of suspicion and charge: during theoretical and legislative classification of these categories the author identifies the absence of sound differences in their essence. The author considers foreign experience in realization of the suspicion and charge statuses in criminal remedial activities. The author comes to the conclusion that on the one hand, the suspicion, due to its procedural demand and importance has the right for independent theoretical development and independent legal regulation and on the other hand, it can be considered as an alternative to charge, since the latter cannot be considered to be the only possible basis for a transfer of a criminal case to a court. The author also accepts the variant when suspicion takes principal procedural time and the charge is defined at the end of criminal proceedings when the case is transferred to a court to be considered on the merits.


Author(s):  
V. M. Togulev

As a result of the 2007-2010 reform, the prosecutor’s office lost the right to initiate criminal investigations and independently investigate them, a significant part of the prosecutor’s authority to supervise the investigative activities of the investigator was transferred from the prosecutor to the head of the investigating authority. These changes have been mixed among practitioners and process scientists. The author considers it inappropriate to return to the prosecutor the right to initiate criminal proceedings, since the prosecutor will have to carry out the whole complex of procedural and investigative actions referred to in art. 144 Code of Criminal Procedure. There is no need to return to the prosecutor’s office and the investigative function, since the prosecutor’s office will become a body of criminal prosecution and supervision and investigation, which will affect the objectivity of its actions and will nullify all the reforms of the investigation carried out over the past 20 years. Nor should powers be transferred to the prosecutor, which as a result of the reform passed to the head of the investigative body. Almost all the powers of the head of the investigative body to implement departmental control over the procedural activities of the investigator to some extent also belong to the prosecutor using special methods of prosecutorial response. The specificity is that the head of the investigating authority uses both the methods of previous and subsequent control, and the prosecutor mainly uses the subsequent one. It is proposed to provide the prosecutor with only one additional authority in relation to the investigator: to give the prosecutor the right, when approving the indictment, to exclude certain points of the charge from it or to re-qualify the charge to a less serious one instead of returning the criminal case to the investigator for these purposes.


Author(s):  
Vasyl Zhmudinskyi

The article deals with problematic issues related to the resumption by a prosecutor of criminal proceedings closed by the decision of an investigator. It is proved that the investigator's decision to close criminal proceedings can be appealed to the investigating judge or prosecutor within ten days of receiving a copy thereof. However, the prosecutor, to monitor the legality and validity of the investigator's decision, can independently reverse the decision to close the criminal proceedings. At the same time, an important point in this situation is that the legislation sets a time frame for the prosecutor, namely twenty days, from the moment he receives the decision from the investigator, during which he can check the decision to close the criminal proceedings for its legality and make a decide on its reversal. Attention is drawn to the fact that prosecutors do not always adhere to the specified twenty-day period and groundlessly reverse legal decisions to close criminal proceedings, referring to Part 6 of Article 36 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which defines the powers of the prosecutor to reverse illegal and unjustified decisions of investigators and subordinate prosecutors within the terms of pre-trial investigation. It is argued that the prosecutor's right to reverse an illegal and unjustified decision to close criminal proceedings is not included in the terms of pre-trial investigation because it is already outside it, and therefore if the prosecutor reverses the specified decision after the expiration of the twenty-day period, it is a violation of Part 6 of Article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. It is noted that to stop the repeated criminal prosecution of participants in criminal proceedings, it is advisable to appeal the prosecutor's decision to resume criminal proceedings to the court, even though that the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine does not a relevant provision in this regard. It is proved that if the court satisfies the complaint and reverses the prosecutor's decision to cancel the decision to close the criminal proceedings, further implementation of the pre-trial investigation will be impossible and the resumed criminal proceedings will be closed. Proposals have been made to improve the criminal procedure legislation in terms of ensuring the right of participants in criminal proceedings to appeal in court against the prosecutor's decision to reverse the decision to close criminal proceedings. Keywords: criminal proceedings, prosecutor, pre-trial investigation, investigator, decision, court.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 214-222
Author(s):  
G. N. Kucherov

The paper discusses the issues of choosing the most effective model of criminal proceedings termination, analyzes the proposed in the scientific literature model of refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer when making an appropriate procedural decision. The author, based on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, studies the relationship between the principle of justice and the legality of procedural decisions to terminate a criminal case and criminal prosecution. The author concludes that the discretionary model of legal regulation of a criminal case and criminal prosecution termination is an effective means of achieving the purpose of criminal proceedings, allowing the law enforcement officer to make a fair decision, given the nature, degree of social danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission, information about the identity of the person who committed the crime. Refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer in the matter of terminating a criminal case will not only not contribute to the humanization of legislation, but will mark the victory of formalism over justice in criminal proceedings.


Temida ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 145-166
Author(s):  
Milica Kovacevic

The paper deals with rights and position of victims in international documents, with special reference to the standards created by the European Court of Human Rights through its practice. This paper aims to provide brief analysis of some of the most important international documents, which set forth basic rights for victims, including: right to participate in the criminal proceedings, right to protection and the right to compensation. The paper intends to analyze these key right (standards, principles) through relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights, given that the wording of the relevant documents does not determine what entails the realization of a specific standard in real life. The main purpose of the article is to examine the compliance of regulations and practices in Serbia with international standards on the status and the rights of victims, from which some recommendations for improvement might arise.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document