The essence and problems of substantiating certain types of decisions in criminal proceedings

V.V. Djafarov
{"title":"The essence and problems of substantiating certain types of decisions in criminal proceedings","authors":"V.V. Djafarov","doi":"10.32523/2616-6844-2021-136-3-98-104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article considers problems of substantiating certain types of decisions in the criminal process. The author’s views are based on recent changes in the criminal procedure legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the existing experience of the Russian Federation. The article focuses on provisions of the current criminal procedure code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The author refers to Russian proceduralists whose works are devoted to the problems of studying the validity of procedural decisions at the pre-trial stage. The author indicated types of decisions, which are not recognized as criminal procedural, but for which justification should be a mandatory criterion according to the criminal procedural legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The article provisions justify the need to enshrine the definition of «reasonableness» in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as a mandatory requirement that must be met when taking decisions by the prosecuting authorities.","PeriodicalId":300299,"journal":{"name":"BULLETIN of L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University. Law Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BULLETIN of L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University. Law Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32523/2616-6844-2021-136-3-98-104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article considers problems of substantiating certain types of decisions in the criminal process. The author’s views are based on recent changes in the criminal procedure legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the existing experience of the Russian Federation. The article focuses on provisions of the current criminal procedure code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The author refers to Russian proceduralists whose works are devoted to the problems of studying the validity of procedural decisions at the pre-trial stage. The author indicated types of decisions, which are not recognized as criminal procedural, but for which justification should be a mandatory criterion according to the criminal procedural legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The article provisions justify the need to enshrine the definition of «reasonableness» in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as a mandatory requirement that must be met when taking decisions by the prosecuting authorities.
刑事诉讼中确证若干类型决定的本质与问题
文章探讨了刑事诉讼中某些类型决定的实证性问题。发件人的观点是根据哈萨克斯坦共和国刑事诉讼立法最近的变化和俄罗斯联邦的现有经验提出的。本文的重点是哈萨克斯坦共和国现行刑事诉讼法的规定。作者参考了俄罗斯程序主义者的著作,他们致力于研究审前阶段程序决定的有效性问题。发件人指出了不被承认为刑事程序性决定的类型,但根据哈萨克斯坦共和国的刑事程序性立法,对这些决定的理由应是一项强制性标准。该条的规定证明,有必要将《哈萨克斯坦共和国刑事诉讼法》中的“合理性”定义作为一项强制性要求,检察机关在作出决定时必须满足这一要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信