禁止变质对于刑事诉讼制度的根本重要性

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
K. Vanyan, N. N. Lysov, M. T. Tashilin, A. Shuisky, I. R. Gilmanov, V. Kosterin
{"title":"禁止变质对于刑事诉讼制度的根本重要性","authors":"K. Vanyan, N. N. Lysov, M. T. Tashilin, A. Shuisky, I. R. Gilmanov, V. Kosterin","doi":"10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(3).212-223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with the problem of the expediency of a criminal case’s returning to the prosecutor at the stage of appointment and preparation of a court session in Russian criminal proceedings. This problem is relevant to the science of criminal procedure.The purpose of the study is to analyze critically the practice of returning of a criminal case back to the prosecutor in order to correct mistakes made at the pre-trial stages of the proceedings according to the new concept of justice independence and the absence of an accusatory bias in the court functioning.The methodological basis of the study is a set of scientific techniques, focused mostly on the dialectical approach, which made it possible to determine the essential characteristics of the prohibition to turn the criminal proceedings in Russia for the worse. Both general scientific (analysis, synthesis, systematic method) and specific scientific methods (formal-legal, historical-legal, comparative-legal) of knowledge were also used. The analysis helped to formulate the position of understanding the turn for the worse as an independent principle of criminal procedural law, to study the procedural form of the turn for the worse. The synthesis method made it possible to determine the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court session as a holistic institution of the criminal procedure. The systematic approach allowed to determine not only the mixed nature of the mechanism for changing the prosecution to a more serious one, but the investigative organization of pre-trial proceedings and its place in the structure of criminal proceedings, the separation of the investigative and “accusatory powers” of the prosecutors as well as their balance. The historical method let us trace the evolution of the prohibition to turn the Soviet and Russian criminal procedural systems for the worse. The comparative-legal method made it possible to assess the potential of domestic legislators' reception of foreign experience of regulating the prohibition to turn for the worse and formulate proposals to improve the Russian criminal procedural legislation.The main scientific results of this research consist of justification of the conclusion of the conversion expediency of the domestic judicial proceedings to the adversarial model of accusation which is carried out within the trial on the previously filed charge. The presentation of a new charge (criminal action) in court and the procedure of supplementing the charge change it for the worse. This model of re-indictment for the worse for the defendant appears to be fairer and more convenient both for the prosecuting authority and for the legal organization of combating crime. The changeover to the suggested form of implementation of the ban to turn for the worse in the institution of bringing and changing charges in court is possible only in a systematic link with the reform of the preliminary investigation. Conclusion. The institution of the criminal case returning by the court to the prosecutor in order to change the charge to a more serious one when implementing the adversarial model of bringing charges in the criminal procedure system of Russia will fully satisfy the concept of independence of justice administration and the absence of an accusatory bias in the activities of the court, while at the same time with fairly organized the prosecutorial power aimed at countering crime.The section 1 was prepared by N.N. Lysov, section 2 by K.D. Vanyan (together with M.T. Tashilin), section 3 by A.S. Shuisky (together with I.R. Gilmanov), section 4 by V.V. Kosterin.","PeriodicalId":40342,"journal":{"name":"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review","volume":"82 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The fundamental importance of the ban on turning for the worse for the criminal procedure system\",\"authors\":\"K. Vanyan, N. N. Lysov, M. T. Tashilin, A. Shuisky, I. R. Gilmanov, V. Kosterin\",\"doi\":\"10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(3).212-223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article deals with the problem of the expediency of a criminal case’s returning to the prosecutor at the stage of appointment and preparation of a court session in Russian criminal proceedings. This problem is relevant to the science of criminal procedure.The purpose of the study is to analyze critically the practice of returning of a criminal case back to the prosecutor in order to correct mistakes made at the pre-trial stages of the proceedings according to the new concept of justice independence and the absence of an accusatory bias in the court functioning.The methodological basis of the study is a set of scientific techniques, focused mostly on the dialectical approach, which made it possible to determine the essential characteristics of the prohibition to turn the criminal proceedings in Russia for the worse. Both general scientific (analysis, synthesis, systematic method) and specific scientific methods (formal-legal, historical-legal, comparative-legal) of knowledge were also used. The analysis helped to formulate the position of understanding the turn for the worse as an independent principle of criminal procedural law, to study the procedural form of the turn for the worse. The synthesis method made it possible to determine the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court session as a holistic institution of the criminal procedure. The systematic approach allowed to determine not only the mixed nature of the mechanism for changing the prosecution to a more serious one, but the investigative organization of pre-trial proceedings and its place in the structure of criminal proceedings, the separation of the investigative and “accusatory powers” of the prosecutors as well as their balance. The historical method let us trace the evolution of the prohibition to turn the Soviet and Russian criminal procedural systems for the worse. The comparative-legal method made it possible to assess the potential of domestic legislators' reception of foreign experience of regulating the prohibition to turn for the worse and formulate proposals to improve the Russian criminal procedural legislation.The main scientific results of this research consist of justification of the conclusion of the conversion expediency of the domestic judicial proceedings to the adversarial model of accusation which is carried out within the trial on the previously filed charge. The presentation of a new charge (criminal action) in court and the procedure of supplementing the charge change it for the worse. This model of re-indictment for the worse for the defendant appears to be fairer and more convenient both for the prosecuting authority and for the legal organization of combating crime. The changeover to the suggested form of implementation of the ban to turn for the worse in the institution of bringing and changing charges in court is possible only in a systematic link with the reform of the preliminary investigation. Conclusion. The institution of the criminal case returning by the court to the prosecutor in order to change the charge to a more serious one when implementing the adversarial model of bringing charges in the criminal procedure system of Russia will fully satisfy the concept of independence of justice administration and the absence of an accusatory bias in the activities of the court, while at the same time with fairly organized the prosecutorial power aimed at countering crime.The section 1 was prepared by N.N. Lysov, section 2 by K.D. Vanyan (together with M.T. Tashilin), section 3 by A.S. Shuisky (together with I.R. Gilmanov), section 4 by V.V. Kosterin.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review\",\"volume\":\"82 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(3).212-223\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravoprimenenie-Law Enforcement Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(3).212-223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该条论述了在俄罗斯刑事诉讼中,在任命和准备开庭阶段将刑事案件归还检察官的权宜之计问题。这个问题与刑事诉讼科学有关。这项研究的目的是批判性地分析将刑事案件退还给检察官的做法,以便根据司法独立的新概念和法院运作中不存在指控偏见来纠正诉讼程序审前阶段所犯的错误。本研究的方法论基础是一套科学的方法,主要集中在辩证的方法上,这使得有可能确定禁止的本质特征,使俄罗斯的刑事诉讼变得更糟。一般的科学方法(分析、综合、系统方法)和具体的科学方法(形式法、历史法、比较法)的知识也被使用。通过分析,确立了将趋坏原则理解为一项独立的刑事诉讼法原则的立场,研究了趋坏原则的程序形式。综合方法使得在任命和准备作为刑事诉讼程序整体机构的法庭会议阶段确定将刑事案件归还检察官成为可能。系统的办法不仅可以确定将起诉改为更严重的起诉的机制的混合性质,而且可以确定审前程序的调查组织及其在刑事诉讼结构中的地位、检察官的调查权和“指控权”的分离以及它们的平衡。历史方法让我们追溯禁令的演变,使苏联和俄罗斯的刑事诉讼制度变得更糟。比较法律方法使人们能够评估国内立法者接受外国管制禁令的经验的可能性,从而使其变得更糟,并拟订改进俄罗斯刑事诉讼立法的建议。本研究的主要科学成果包括证明国内司法程序的权宜之计向对抗性指控模式转换的结论是正当的,这种对抗性指控模式是在对先前提出的指控的审判中进行的。在法庭上提出新的指控(刑事诉讼)和补充指控的程序使情况变得更糟。这种对被告不利的重新起诉模式似乎对检察机关和打击犯罪的法律组织都更公平和更方便。只有与初步调查的改革有系统的联系,才有可能转变为建议的执行禁令的形式,使在法庭上提出和改变指控的制度变得更糟。结论。在俄罗斯刑事诉讼制度中实行对抗式起诉模式时,法院将刑事案件交由检察官处理,以便将指控改为更严重的指控,这一制度将充分满足司法行政独立和法院活动中不存在指控偏见的概念,同时具有公平组织的旨在打击犯罪的检察权。第1部分由N.N. Lysov编写,第2部分由K.D. Vanyan(与M.T. Tashilin一起)编写,第3部分由A.S. Shuisky(与I.R. Gilmanov一起)编写,第4部分由V.V. Kosterin编写。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The fundamental importance of the ban on turning for the worse for the criminal procedure system
The article deals with the problem of the expediency of a criminal case’s returning to the prosecutor at the stage of appointment and preparation of a court session in Russian criminal proceedings. This problem is relevant to the science of criminal procedure.The purpose of the study is to analyze critically the practice of returning of a criminal case back to the prosecutor in order to correct mistakes made at the pre-trial stages of the proceedings according to the new concept of justice independence and the absence of an accusatory bias in the court functioning.The methodological basis of the study is a set of scientific techniques, focused mostly on the dialectical approach, which made it possible to determine the essential characteristics of the prohibition to turn the criminal proceedings in Russia for the worse. Both general scientific (analysis, synthesis, systematic method) and specific scientific methods (formal-legal, historical-legal, comparative-legal) of knowledge were also used. The analysis helped to formulate the position of understanding the turn for the worse as an independent principle of criminal procedural law, to study the procedural form of the turn for the worse. The synthesis method made it possible to determine the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor at the stage of appointment and preparation of the court session as a holistic institution of the criminal procedure. The systematic approach allowed to determine not only the mixed nature of the mechanism for changing the prosecution to a more serious one, but the investigative organization of pre-trial proceedings and its place in the structure of criminal proceedings, the separation of the investigative and “accusatory powers” of the prosecutors as well as their balance. The historical method let us trace the evolution of the prohibition to turn the Soviet and Russian criminal procedural systems for the worse. The comparative-legal method made it possible to assess the potential of domestic legislators' reception of foreign experience of regulating the prohibition to turn for the worse and formulate proposals to improve the Russian criminal procedural legislation.The main scientific results of this research consist of justification of the conclusion of the conversion expediency of the domestic judicial proceedings to the adversarial model of accusation which is carried out within the trial on the previously filed charge. The presentation of a new charge (criminal action) in court and the procedure of supplementing the charge change it for the worse. This model of re-indictment for the worse for the defendant appears to be fairer and more convenient both for the prosecuting authority and for the legal organization of combating crime. The changeover to the suggested form of implementation of the ban to turn for the worse in the institution of bringing and changing charges in court is possible only in a systematic link with the reform of the preliminary investigation. Conclusion. The institution of the criminal case returning by the court to the prosecutor in order to change the charge to a more serious one when implementing the adversarial model of bringing charges in the criminal procedure system of Russia will fully satisfy the concept of independence of justice administration and the absence of an accusatory bias in the activities of the court, while at the same time with fairly organized the prosecutorial power aimed at countering crime.The section 1 was prepared by N.N. Lysov, section 2 by K.D. Vanyan (together with M.T. Tashilin), section 3 by A.S. Shuisky (together with I.R. Gilmanov), section 4 by V.V. Kosterin.
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
66.70%
发文量
79
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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