俄罗斯轻微暴力犯罪审判中的检察官作用

V. Volkov
{"title":"俄罗斯轻微暴力犯罪审判中的检察官作用","authors":"V. Volkov","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2816393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Russian Criminal Procedure Code specifies two possible types of trial for petty violent offences. The normal procedure is referred to as private prosecution. The victim initiates the case by submitting the claim directly to the court and acts as prosecutor. The second possible trial type for the same category of offences includes preliminary investigation by the police and the participation of the public prosecutor in court hearings on behalf of the victim. In practice both procedures are used with comparable frequency. The paper utilizes this duality of procedure and employs the quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design to compare trial outcomes in the two types of trial and examine the effects associated with the participation of the public prosecutor in court. It uses two datasets: (a) that includes information on the entire population of defendants tried for offences in question between 2009 and 2013 and (b) that resulted from the one-to-one merger of (a) with the dataset generated from court verdict texts available online. Controlling for the selection of cases into the public prosecutor track as well as for legal and extralegal characteristics of offence and offender, the analysis establishes that the participation of the public prosecutor in trials reduces the probability of acquittal and increases the probability of reconciliation of parties and case dismissal (conditional upon the admission of guilt). Another dimension of the public prosecutor effect is the mitigation of disparities in the likelihood of acquittal associated with the occupational status of defendant, save for the law enforcement employees. The latter are more likely to be acquitted than defendants with other occupational status and are less probable to reconcile with the victim.","PeriodicalId":273284,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Procedure eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Prosecutor Effects in Trials for Petty Violent Offences in Russia\",\"authors\":\"V. Volkov\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2816393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Russian Criminal Procedure Code specifies two possible types of trial for petty violent offences. The normal procedure is referred to as private prosecution. The victim initiates the case by submitting the claim directly to the court and acts as prosecutor. The second possible trial type for the same category of offences includes preliminary investigation by the police and the participation of the public prosecutor in court hearings on behalf of the victim. In practice both procedures are used with comparable frequency. The paper utilizes this duality of procedure and employs the quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design to compare trial outcomes in the two types of trial and examine the effects associated with the participation of the public prosecutor in court. It uses two datasets: (a) that includes information on the entire population of defendants tried for offences in question between 2009 and 2013 and (b) that resulted from the one-to-one merger of (a) with the dataset generated from court verdict texts available online. Controlling for the selection of cases into the public prosecutor track as well as for legal and extralegal characteristics of offence and offender, the analysis establishes that the participation of the public prosecutor in trials reduces the probability of acquittal and increases the probability of reconciliation of parties and case dismissal (conditional upon the admission of guilt). Another dimension of the public prosecutor effect is the mitigation of disparities in the likelihood of acquittal associated with the occupational status of defendant, save for the law enforcement employees. The latter are more likely to be acquitted than defendants with other occupational status and are less probable to reconcile with the victim.\",\"PeriodicalId\":273284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminal Procedure eJournal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminal Procedure eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2816393\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Procedure eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2816393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《俄罗斯刑事诉讼法》对轻微暴力犯罪规定了两种可能的审判类型。正常的诉讼程序被称为自诉。受害者通过直接向法院提出索赔并作为检察官提起诉讼。对同类罪行的第二种可能的审判类型包括由警察进行初步调查和公诉人代表受害人参加法庭听证。在实践中,这两种程序的使用频率相当。本文利用这种程序的二元性,采用准实验非等效对照组设计,比较两种审判类型的审判结果,并考察与公诉人参与法庭有关的影响。它使用两个数据集:(a)包括2009年至2013年期间因相关罪行而受审的所有被告的信息;(b)是(a)与在线法院判决文本生成的数据集一对一合并的结果。在控制将案件选入检察官轨道以及罪行和罪犯的法律和法外特征的情况下,分析确定,检察官参与审判降低了无罪释放的可能性,并增加了各方和解和撤诉的可能性(以承认有罪为条件)。公诉人效应的另一个方面是减少了与被告职业状况有关的无罪释放可能性的差异,执法人员除外。后者比具有其他职业地位的被告更容易被无罪释放,也更不可能与受害者和解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Prosecutor Effects in Trials for Petty Violent Offences in Russia
The Russian Criminal Procedure Code specifies two possible types of trial for petty violent offences. The normal procedure is referred to as private prosecution. The victim initiates the case by submitting the claim directly to the court and acts as prosecutor. The second possible trial type for the same category of offences includes preliminary investigation by the police and the participation of the public prosecutor in court hearings on behalf of the victim. In practice both procedures are used with comparable frequency. The paper utilizes this duality of procedure and employs the quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design to compare trial outcomes in the two types of trial and examine the effects associated with the participation of the public prosecutor in court. It uses two datasets: (a) that includes information on the entire population of defendants tried for offences in question between 2009 and 2013 and (b) that resulted from the one-to-one merger of (a) with the dataset generated from court verdict texts available online. Controlling for the selection of cases into the public prosecutor track as well as for legal and extralegal characteristics of offence and offender, the analysis establishes that the participation of the public prosecutor in trials reduces the probability of acquittal and increases the probability of reconciliation of parties and case dismissal (conditional upon the admission of guilt). Another dimension of the public prosecutor effect is the mitigation of disparities in the likelihood of acquittal associated with the occupational status of defendant, save for the law enforcement employees. The latter are more likely to be acquitted than defendants with other occupational status and are less probable to reconcile with the victim.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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