scholarly journals Pozycja pokrzywdzonego w świetle nowelizacji Kodeksu postępowania karnego z 19 lipca 2019 r.

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 127-148
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Limańska ◽  
Marta Pustuła
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Time Limit ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Injured Party ◽  
Polish Code

This article addresses some amendments of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure in so far as they affect the position of the injured party. The Act of 19 July 2019 amending the Polish Code of Criminal Code provides for a number of changes relating to that participant of criminal proceedings. The paper deals with the extension of the time limit within which it is possible to withdraw a motion to prosecute, changes to the so-called subsidiary complaint, setting a deadline for questioning the injured under Articles 185a and 185c of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure or serving the injured party with an order to pay (injunctive judgment) alongside the instructions on how to appeal against the judgment and simultaneously file a statement that the injured will act in the capacity of a subsidiary prosecution counsel. The analysis is aimed to establish whether those changes have led to the strengthening or weakening of the position of the injured party.

scholarly journals „Osoba podejrzana”, „podejrzany” i „oskarżony” w polskim procesie karnym – zakres pojęciowy

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-171
Author(s):  
Mariusz Kucharczyk
Keyword(s):  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Sensu Stricto ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Standing ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Polish Code ◽  
Precise Time

The subject of this article is nomenclatural interpretation of the notions of “a person of interest”, “a suspect” and “a defendant” in Polish Code of Criminal Procedure – the parties in criminal proceedings who are suspected of committing a crime or who are charged with a crime. The article discusses the legal definitions of the word “suspect” according to Article 71 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (i.e. a person against whom a statement of objections has been issued and a person who has been charged on the grounds of examination of the person in question as a suspect) as well as the word “defendant” according to Article 71 § 2 and 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (sensu stricto and sensu largo). Moreover, the article provides an overview of the available definitions of “a suspect” and “a person of interest” – parties named directly in the Code of Criminal Procedure. In addition to that, the article discusses the notion of “actual suspect” (whose definition and understanding varies in the doctrine), which emerged from the previously effective Code of Criminal Procedure. The article analyses the legal standing of such an “actual suspect” in the context of Article 233 § 1a of the Criminal Code (a regulation which is considered potentially unconstitutional). While discussing the figure of the “suspect”, the author analyzes terms such as “issuing” and “preparation” – in connection with Article 71 § 1 and 313 § 1 of the Criminal Code and the lack of agreement within the discipline regarding the precise time at which the statement of objections has been issued (which is connected with obtaining the position of the passive party to proceedings in criminal procedure).Moreover, the article discusses in some detail the legal standing of a person against which a motion has been presented, according to Article 354 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, regarding the discontinuation of proceedings and issuing preventive measures protecting the person of an insane perpetrator – in the context of nomenclature.

scholarly journals THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION: PROBLEMS OF THE OBJECT AND THE OBJECTIVE SIDE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Alexandra Vladimirovna Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Complex Analysis ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Body ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject. The article is devoted to the investigation of the main direct object and the circle of victims are subjected of harm by criminal acts stipulated by pts. 1, 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.The purpose of the paper is to identify does the art. 294 of Criminal Code of the Russian Federation meets the other provisions of criminal procedure legislation.The methodology of research includes methods of complex analysis, synthesis, as well as formal-logical, comparative legal and formal-legal methods.Results and scope of application. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The discrep-ancy lies in terms of the range of participants in criminal proceedings and the functions performed by them, as well as the actual content and correlation of such stages of criminal proceedings as the initiation of criminal proceedings and preliminary investigation. In addi-tion, the current state of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not take into account the ever-widening differentiation of criminal proceedings.The circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented by such participants in the criminal process as a criminal investi-gator, the head of the investigative body, the head of the inquiry department, the head of the body of inquiry. At the same time, the author supports the position that the criminal-legal protection of the said persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.The circle of criminal acts provided for in art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Fed-eration, should also be specified with an indication of encroachment in the form of kidnapping, destruction or damage to such a crime as materials of criminal, civil and other cases, as well as material evidence.Conclusions. The content of art. 294 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not comply with the provisions of the criminal procedure law. The author formulates the conclusion that the circle of victims listed in pt. 2 of art. 294 of the Criminal Code should be broadened and joins the position that the criminal-legal protection of these persons should cover not only their activities at the stage of preliminary investigation, but also of the entire pre-trial proceedings as a whole.

scholarly journals Classification of crimes in designing criminal procedure regulations

2019 ◽  
pp. 130-137
Author(s):  
A. G. Kulev ◽  
L. O. Kuleva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Great Influence ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Substantive Law

The rules on categorization of crimes are substantive and legal by their nature. Nevertheless, they have a great influence on the state and development of criminal procedural matter. It is proposed to divide the provisions of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, which reflect the provisions of Art. 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, into two groups. The first group includes the norms of criminal proceedings that are a kind of logical continuation of criminal law regulations related to exemption from criminal liability and punishment. The second group consists of strictly procedural rules that are not directly dependent on the substantive law: the composition of the bench, jurisdiction and competence of criminal cases, bail hearing, negotiations control and recording, the return of a criminal case to the prosecutor. Particular attention is given to the possibility for the court to change the classification of crimes. Based on the studied theoretical sources and court practice, the authors make suggestions aimed at improving the existing criminal procedure legislation and optimizing its application in the framework of the issues raised.

scholarly journals Criminal legal basis for an expedited trial procedure provided by the chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-208
Author(s):  
A. V. Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Court Proceedings

The subject of study is the criminal-legal basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling when the accused person agrees with the charge. These issues are relevant, since in July 2020 the substantive legal basis of the expedited procedure in Russia was changed and now this procedure can only be applied in criminal cases of small and medium gravity.The aim of this work is to study the substantive legal basis of an expedited procedure of litigation from the point of view of the changes were made to it. The author expresses the thesis that the legislators did not quite reasonably link criminal-legal grounds of the expedited procedure with the system of categories of crimes.The methodology. The author used general scientific methods (dialectical, historical, methods of formal logic, system analysis) as well as method of formal legal interpretation of Russian Criminal Code and judicial decisions of Russian courts.The main results, scope of application. The criminal and legal basis of certain criminal procedure is a package of criminal law standards, for the implementation of which a certain criminal and procedural form is intended. The parameters of the substantive basis of criminal proceedings are set with the signs that shall be indicated in the Code of Criminal Procedure and may change. It directly refers to the expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling, by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code. Initially, it was assumed that the application of this procedure is permissible in criminal cases concerning crimes the punishment for which does not exceed 5 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code. The expedited court proceedings began to be applied in criminal cases concerning crimes, the punishment for which does not exceed 10 years imprisonment in accordance with the Russian Criminal Code, since 2003. The Russian Supreme Court made an attempt to reduce the application of court proceedings provided by Chapter 40 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code in 2019. It turned out to be successful. Legislators have changed the basic criterion that determines the substantive basis for an expedited procedure for adopting a court ruling. Now the system of categories of crimes is this basis. The system of categories of crimes presented in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is not stable enough and is based on a set of provisions of this Code, but the sanctions for many crimes are not scientifically and practically grounded in this Code. In addition, the classification of crimes enshrined in Article 15 of the Russian Criminal Code is based on such a criterion as the nature and degree of public danger of the crime. These categories are among the most complex in the science of criminal law.Conclusions. The use of categories of crimes as a criterion for determining the criminal legal basis of the expedited procedure for making a court decision significantly complicates the application of the expedited procedure.

scholarly journals Criminal misdemeanors as a novelty of criminal and criminal procedure legislation

2020 ◽  
pp. 365-368
Author(s):  
Andrii Begma ◽  
Galyna Muliar ◽  
Oleksii Khovpun
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
Medical Examinations

The scientific article pays attention to the consideration of the concepts of “criminal offense”, “criminal offense”, “crime” andtheir implementation in criminal and criminal procedure legislation. Amendments to the legislation that came into force in connectionwith the adoption of the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Simplification of Pre-trial Inves -tigation of Certain Categories of Criminal Offenses” are considered. The issue devoted to the new subject of criminal procedure – thecoroner and the head of the inquiry body is investigated.The article considers the types of evidence that are taken into account in the investigation of criminal offenses. Such evidenceshould include: explanations of persons, results of medical examination, expert opinion, testimony of technical devices and technicalmeans that have the functions of photography and filming, video recording, or means of photography and filming, video recording. Thepossibility of using evidence in the investigation of crimes is considered.During the criminal proceedings, a new entity is identified, which is actually engaged in the investigation of criminal offenses,such an entity is the investigator. Inquiry is a new unit that investigates criminal offenses. Inquiries are carried out by inquiry subdivisionsor authorized persons of other subdivisions.A criminal offense is an act (action or omission) provided by the Criminal Code, for which the main penalty is a fine of not morethan three thousand non-taxable minimum incomes or other punishment not related to imprisonment. Procedural sources of evidencein criminal proceedings on criminal offenses, in addition to certain Art. 84 of the CPC, there are also explanations of persons, the resultsof medical examinations, expert opinion, indications of technical devices and technical means that have the functions of photographyand filming, video recording, or means of photography and filming, video recording.The legislator does not rule out that the sources of evidence are testimony, physical evidence, documents, expert opinions, but infact the explanations of persons, the results of medical examinations, expert opinion, indications of technical devices and equipmentthat have the functions of photography and filming, video or photo – and filming, video recordings are also identified as sources of evidence.The purpose of such a division is to distinguish between sources of evidence that can be used to prove crimes and criminal offenses.In addition, there is a misunderstanding – what exactly can we use to form the evidence base in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Prace nad kodyfikacją prawa karnego procesowego w Polsce w latach 1919–1928

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 37-50
Author(s):  
Józef Koredczuk
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Main Role ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Polish Code ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

In his contribution, the author presents the work on the codification (initially on the Act) of procedural criminal law in Poland in the years 1919–1928. Those works were initially led by the Criminal Department of the Codification Committee, and then by the Criminal Proceedings Section of the Codification Commission. The first period of the work on the criminal procedure law was characterized by some disputes between the members of the Department, i.e. supporters of the classical school (E. Krzymuski) vs. the sociological school (J. Makarewicz), the discussion aiming at defining the relationship of procedural criminal law and substantive criminal law. The work on the draft law was carried out faster after the appointment (on 16 July 1920) of the Criminal Proceedings Section, which in 1924 published the first version of the draft criminal law bill. E. Krzymuski, A. Mogilnicki, Z. Rymowicz and E.S. Rappaport had played the main role in the development of the project. After a very deep criticism in the columns of Gazeta Administracji i Policji Państwowej [The Gazette of State Administration and Police], Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny [The legal, economic and sociological movement] and Palestra [The bar], the project was rejected. Only the second version of the bill prepared in 1925-1926, re-worked by the committee composed of W. Makowski, A. Mogilnicki and S. Śliwiński (appointed by the Minister of Justice), became the basis for the President of the Republic of Poland to adopt the first Polish Code of Criminal Procedure of 19 March 1928.

scholarly journals Towards an American Model of Criminal Process: The Reform of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Roclawska ◽  
Adam Bulat
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
American Model ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Polish Code

Abstract In September 2013, the Polish Parliament passed an amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure. The legislators decided to expand a number of adversarial elements present in current Polish criminal proceedings. When these changes come into effect (July 1, 2015), Polish criminal procedure will be similar to American regulations, in which the judge’s role is to be an impartial arbitrator, not an investigator. The authors of the article describe the meaning of the principle of adversarial trial in Poland. They also emphasized relations between this principle and the concept of “material truth”. The changes established by the amendment are shown in perspective of the American definition of adversarial trial. The authors analyze the reform and attempt to predict the problems with new regulations in practice.

scholarly journals Relevant issues of conducting verification of reports on illegal banking operations

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Anisya Aleksandrovna Dementyeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Legitimate Business ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Major Attention ◽  
Banking Operations

This article is dedicated to the issues of conducting audit pursuant to the Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on report of crimes established by the Article 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Methodological framework for this research consists of dialectical, logical, and formal-legal methods; the normative framework is comprised of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal and criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, local normative acts that regulate the conduct of audit initiating at the stage of initiating a criminal case. Major attention is turned to the theoretical and applied issues associated with the initiation of criminal cases stipulated by the Article 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Analysis is conducted on the peculiarities of seizure of objects and documents on this category of crime; as well as on the goals, tasks, methods of seizure, and admissible procedural actions. The author examines the questions of admissibility of evidence received at the state of opening a criminal case, their role in subsequent stages of criminal proceedings. Assessment is given to the existing theoretical and practical views on the possibility of instituting a search and seizure prior to opening a criminal case. The author analyzes case law on the topic, and concludes on the need for further amendments. The importance of observing the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and companies in the course of pre-trial proceedings pertinent to the reports of illegal banking operations is substantiated. The author also indicates that arbitrary interference of law enforcement agencies in legitimate business activity is unacceptable.  

scholarly journals Procedure for exemption from punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided

2019 ◽  
pp. 72-80
Author(s):  
A. Chugaievska
Keyword(s):  
General Procedure ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Immediate Release ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Law

Analysis of the criminal procedure for exemption from punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided; analysis of current status of the problem provided; the key problems and legislative gaps identified, and respective solutions developed. The study revealed that the procedure for exemption from the court-sentenced punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided, has no sufficiently and precise regulations in the criminal procedural legislation. The goal of research is analyzing procedural order of exemption person from appointed sentence of court for action, the punishment of which is eliminated by law, identifying a range of problems which connects with procedural order of exemptions from the sentence imposed in connection with adoption of the law which eliminates the criminal act and amendment of improving current criminal procedural legislation. In the framework of the analysis of the recent studies, researches and respective publications it has been examined the current status of the scientific researches of the issues on exemption from the court-sentenced punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided (part 2 of the Article 74 of the Criminal Code). The grounded conclusion reads that that the procedure for this type of exemption from the court-sentenced punishment is insufficiently studied. Within the framework of implementing the tasks on analyzing the procedure for exemption from the court-sentenced punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided, detection a range of issues related to the procedure for exemption from the court-sentenced punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided and contributing recommendations for improvement of the current criminal procedural legislation, the following conclusions and recommendations were proposed. In particular, the application of of legal act on decriminalization at the criminal proceedings does not require a specific regulations. However, the general procedure for examining issues while executing a sentence requires taking into account specific cases of exemption from court-sentenced punishment. The ensuring of the prescribed by the Part 2 of Art. 74 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine "immediate" release of a person from a punishment sentenced by a court, should be supported by improving the procedural terms of consideration of the petition for release and introduction of a separate regulations. It is recommended to implement into the procedure a list of grounds (issues) that the court must consider during a trial and resolving the issue of release from punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided. In addition, it is appropriate in our opinion to oblige the court in deciding whether to release a person from punishment on the ground of legal act on decriminalization provided, while applying the exemption from punishment under Part 2 of Art. 74 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, to consider the issue of eradication of conviction the person who was sentenced.

The Main Signs of the Duality of the Specialist Position in Criminal Proceedings

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (10) ◽  
pp. 59-74
Author(s):  
L. K. Bondarenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Semantic Analysis ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Russian Federation

The author examines the problem of the special knowledge functioning in criminal proceedings. By synchronizing the institutions of the criminal procedure that regulate the legal relationship between the knowledgeable persons and the institution of criminal law regulating the responsibility of these participants in the commission of a crime against justice, the author demonstartes asymmetry between the rights and duties of a specialist. The subject of the study is constituted by the contradictions between the institutions of procedural and substantive law, namely, the discrepancy between the procedural complex (rights, duties, functions) of a specialist to the course of his criminal responsibility. For this purpose, a comparison is made between the rights and obligations of knowledgeable persons, based on the criteria of: a) the scope of procedural functions; b) the specificity of procedural rights and obligations; c) actual forms of special knowledge acceptable as evidence. On the basis of the revealed contradictions, the situation of competitiveness of special knowledge is investigated; the legal significance of the forms of special knowledge is determined. The author proposes a systematic solution, namely: 1) to clarify the procedural status of a specialist: to add the definition of “forensic specialist” to Art. 58, 61, 71, 74, 80, part 4 of Art. 164, art. 168, 251, 270, 271 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; 2) to clarify the epistemological aspects of the research functions of a specialist in accordance with Part 3.1 of Art. 74, art. 80; Part 1.2 of Art. 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; 3) to establish a mechanism for the responsibility of a specialist for giving a deliberately false opinion: to add to Art. 58 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, part 5 by analogy with part 5 of Art. 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; to supplement the text of Part 1 of Art. 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; to correct the content of Art. 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Or release the specialist from criminal liability for the opinion expressed by him (even if it is deliberately false). The author proves that the proposed measures will promote adversarial evidence, increase the specialist’s subjective responsibility for the conclusion given by him, which corresponds to the institution of proving.The main research methods are: general scientific methods, review and analysis of legislative sources, contextual method, semantic analysis and formal logical analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document