Procedural means of combating extremism

Ladmila Bormotova
{"title":"Procedural means of combating extremism","authors":"Ladmila Bormotova","doi":"10.31857/s102694520018238-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, using the comparative legal method, criminal procedural measures to counter extremist crimes are considered. For this purpose, the legislation of several States belonging to different legal families has been studied. The author concludes that in the global trends of countering extremism and terrorism, there is an active inclusion in the criminal procedure sphere not only measures to identify and solve crimes of the designated orientation, but also recompesatory technologies are being introduced. Under them, in the most general form, it is proposed to understand a kind of rejection of the procedural form in general or its replacement with non-traditional tools in favor of the final result in a criminal case. Similar means of combating extremism abroad take place where police and judicial discretion is developed, which significantly differs from the formalization of criminal investigation and judicial proceedings. There is no special procedural form for criminal cases on extremism or terrorism in the Russian Federation. The criminal procedure legislation provides for the possibility of concluding a pre-trial cooperation agreement and the adoption of a final decision by the court in such a case in a special order. Foreign mechanisms are much broader and depend on the discretion of the law enforcement officer. At the same time, in addition to the court, the right to simplify or complicate procedures may belong to the prosecutor’s office or even the police. This, according to the author, is the fundamental difference in approaches to combating extremist crimes and at the same time a direction for thinking about the possibilities of implementing effective means into domestic legislation and practice.","PeriodicalId":82769,"journal":{"name":"Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo","volume":"83 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31857/s102694520018238-2","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

In this article, using the comparative legal method, criminal procedural measures to counter extremist crimes are considered. For this purpose, the legislation of several States belonging to different legal families has been studied. The author concludes that in the global trends of countering extremism and terrorism, there is an active inclusion in the criminal procedure sphere not only measures to identify and solve crimes of the designated orientation, but also recompesatory technologies are being introduced. Under them, in the most general form, it is proposed to understand a kind of rejection of the procedural form in general or its replacement with non-traditional tools in favor of the final result in a criminal case. Similar means of combating extremism abroad take place where police and judicial discretion is developed, which significantly differs from the formalization of criminal investigation and judicial proceedings. There is no special procedural form for criminal cases on extremism or terrorism in the Russian Federation. The criminal procedure legislation provides for the possibility of concluding a pre-trial cooperation agreement and the adoption of a final decision by the court in such a case in a special order. Foreign mechanisms are much broader and depend on the discretion of the law enforcement officer. At the same time, in addition to the court, the right to simplify or complicate procedures may belong to the prosecutor’s office or even the police. This, according to the author, is the fundamental difference in approaches to combating extremist crimes and at the same time a direction for thinking about the possibilities of implementing effective means into domestic legislation and practice.
打击极端主义的程序手段
本文运用比较法的方法,对打击极端主义犯罪的刑事诉讼措施进行了探讨。为此目的,研究了属于不同法系的几个国家的立法。笔者认为,在打击极端主义和恐怖主义的全球趋势中,刑事诉讼领域不仅积极纳入认定和解决定向犯罪的措施,而且正在引入补偿技术。在它们之下,在最一般的形式下,建议将其理解为一种对一般程序形式的拒绝,或者用非传统工具代替程序形式,以有利于刑事案件的最终结果。在发展了警察和司法自由裁量权的地方,也有类似的打击极端主义的手段,这与刑事调查和司法程序的正式化有很大不同。在俄罗斯联邦,关于极端主义或恐怖主义的刑事案件没有特别的程序表格。刑事诉讼法规定,在这种情况下,法院有可能在特别命令下缔结审前合作协定并作出最后决定。国外的机制要广泛得多,取决于执法人员的自由裁量权。同时,除法院外,简化或复杂化程序的权利可能属于检察官办公室,甚至警察。发件人认为,这是打击极端主义罪行的方法的根本区别,同时也是考虑在国内立法和实践中实施有效手段的可能性的方向。
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
CiteScore
0.30
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