ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE JUDICIAL PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

The article contains an analysis of topical issues of administrative judicial procedure and administrative procedure. The author substantiates the conclusion about self-sufficiency of law of administrative judicial procedure and proposes directions for its further development. This development is associated with the adoption of legislation on the administrative procedure in Russia. This step can resolve a number of conceptual issues: 1) elimination of excessive preliminary judicial control over activities of the executive branch, the use of preliminary judicial control only where it is needed; 2) optimal regulation of pre-trial and judicial proof, as well as the procedure for reimbursement of legal costs; 3) forming of subject of administrative dispute prior to initiation of judicial procedure, which subsequently makes it possible to clearly delineate procedural rights and obligations of the court and the parties of administrative dispute. As a result, it is concluded that the optimal coordination of legal regulation of administrative procedure and legal regulation of administrative judicial procedure should provide the most effective protection of the rights of individuals and legal entities arising from public legal relations. The new legal regulation should not be aimed at restriction of procedural rights (for example, by introducing a mandatory pretrial procedure for resolving of all types of administrative disputes).

Pretrial procedure for disputes settlement associated with challenging transactions of the debtor within the framework of the case of insolvency (bankruptcy)

The object this research is the social relations developed in terms of the mandatory pretrial of disputes settlement associated with challenging transactions of the debtor. Subject of this research is the set of legal norms regulating the relations in the area of challenging transactions of the debtor, as well as the law enforcement practice. The research is carried out through the prism of consideration of such problem as the absence in the current legislation of the Russian Federation of the norm that establishes compliance with the pretrial procedure for dispute settlement associated with challenging transactions of the debtor. Special attention is given to analysis of the norms of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, Federal Law No. 127-FZ of 10.26.2002 “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)” and the law enforcement practice. The goal of this work consists in articulation of the problem, substantiation of the need for legislative regulation in the indicated field, as well as development of proposals on improvement of the Bankruptcy Act. The scientific novelty lies in the fact that the field of this research has not yet acted as an independent subject of scientific understanding. The scientific novelty is defined by the fact that this topic has not previously become a subject of a separate scientific research, as well as in systemic and comparative legal approach, analysis and criticism of legal sources. The conclusion is made on the need for legislative consolidation of the mandatory pretrial disputes settlement associated with challenging transactions of the debtor. The acquired may be valuable in further formulation of the proposals on improvement of legislation and law enforcement practice within the science of Russian law.

Jurisdiction in administrative cases on recognition of information posted on the Internet prohibited for distribution in the Russian Federation as an Institution of administrative procedure law

This article analyzes peculiarities of jurisdiction on recognition information posted on the Internet prohibited for distribution in the Russian Federation, which is a relatively new institution of administrative procedure law. The subject of this research is the norms established in the Chapter 27.1 of the Code of Administrative Legal Proceedings of the Russian Federation, which form an autonomous institution of administrative procedure law of the Russian Federation. The provisions of this chapter are serve as the foundation for settling public law disputes emerging as a result of posting information on the Internet resources. The main conclusion consists in the statement that the concept of “information prohibited for distribution on the territory of the Russian Federation” needs to be amended, since the current legislation contains not only the rules that define information posted on the Internet. The author also underlines the need for introducing into the text of Administrative Procedure Code of pretrial procedure of consideration of administrative cases. The article substantiates that court procedure on recognition of information prohibited for distribution should be transparent and thoroughly regulated. At the same time, the case law confirms that legal process of recognition of information posted on the Internet prohibited for distribution in the Russian Federation is not flawless.

The Underlying Reasons of Hardly Excluding Illegally Obtained Evidence in China

Although Chinese exclusionary rule reform made significant progress in technology, China does not fundamentally change the operating environment of exclusionary rule. With respect to the function of criminal court hearing, it is difficult for us to find ample scope for the exclusionary rule. On the one hand, the particular mutual coordination among investigators, procuratorates and courts in China, and the criminal procedure structure centered on the pretrial procedure basically determine that it is difficult for the defense party to completely overthrow the procuratorate's prosecution through applying for excluding illegally obtained evidence. Even if the defense party can occasionally impel the court to exclude illegally obtained evidence by forceful evidence, the defendant fails to change the result of being convicted. On the other hand, in the case of a formalistic court investigation and the phase separation between hearing and adjudicating, coupled with excessive emphasis on the truth of a case fact, the exclusionary rule with the high expectations of the whole society still exists in name only as before.

The Role of the Investigative Prosecutor and Judge in the Pre-Trial Proceedings in Kosovo (1999-2013)

The journey of the human society has gone through many challenges, the organization of which was based on written and unwritten rules that were used to preserve the kind. Later on these rules are replaced with written codes and laws. The separation in between criminal law and criminal procedure has its genesis with the appearance of the Austrian Criminal Code (1803). As it is historically known, after the Balkan Wars (1912), Kosovo was invaded by Serbia and Montenegro. On the Paris Conference (1919-1944) it was appended to the Yugoslavian Kingdom, Tito’s Yugoslavia (1945-1989 constitutive element of Yugoslavia). On March 23rd 1989 Milosevic destroyed its Autonomy with violence. On 1998-99 the war with Serbia breaks out, which on 10th of June 1999 ended (after NATO’s intervention), therefore installing the UNMIK Misssion and administration that even after the Declaration of Independence of Kosovo (17th February 2008). After UNMIK’s administration in Kosovo, the Law of the Criminal Procedure of ex-Yugoslavia was an applicable law. Its application was extended until the drafting and application of the Temporary Criminal Procedure Code of Kosovo (2004). The comparative methodology, written sources and different official raports are used to write this paper. The comparative data shows that with new Code, the authority of the Prosecution is empowered therefore weakening the role of the Court in the pretrial procedure, the number of the prescribed cases has risen and the discontent of the citizens also, towards the judicial system.

The Role of the Investigative Prosecutor and Judge in the Pre-Trial Proceedings in Kosovo (1999-2013)

The journey of the human society has gone through many challenges, the organization of which was based on written and unwritten rules that were used to preserve the kind. Later on these rules are replaced with written codes and laws. The separation in between criminal law and criminal procedure has its genesis with the appearance of the Austrian Criminal Code (1803). As it is historically known, after the Balkan Wars (1912), Kosovo was invaded by Serbia and Montenegro. On the Paris Conference (1919-1944) it was appended to the Yugoslavian Kingdom, Tito’s Yugoslavia (1945-1989 constitutive element of Yugoslavia). On March 23rd 1989 Milosevic destroyed its Autonomy with violence. On 1998-99 the war with Serbia breaks out, which on 10th of June 1999 ended (after NATO’s intervention), therefore installing the UNMIK Misssion and administration that even after the Declaration of Independence of Kosovo (17th February 2008). After UNMIK’s administration in Kosovo, the Law of the Criminal Procedure of ex-Yugoslavia was an applicable law. Its application was extended until the drafting and application of the Temporary Criminal Procedure Code of Kosovo (2004). The comparative methodology, written sources and different official raports are used to write this paper. The comparative data shows that with new Code, the authority of the Prosecution is empowered therefore weakening the role of the Court in the pretrial procedure, the number of the prescribed cases has risen and the discontent of the citizens also, towards the judicial system.

PERBANDINGAN PRAKTIK PRAPERADILAN DAN PEMBENTUKAN HAKIM PEMERIKSA PENDAHULUAN DALAM PERADILAN PIDANA INDONESIA

This article aims to identify and analyze the conception and practice of the object pre-trial expansion in Indonesia based on several court verdicts and the second is to compare pretrial in the Code of Criminal Procedure Law that prevail and Preliminary Examining Judge in the draft of Criminal Procedure Code. The research shows that pre-trial authority expansion can be understood as a judicial authority effort to check the investigator or prosecutor in upholding the code of criminal procedure. Hence, when comparing the pretrial procedure and the Preliminary Examining Judge. Tulisan bertujuan untuk melakukan analisis praktik perluasan obyek praperadilan di Indonesia dan melakukan perbandingan praperadilan dalam Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP) dengan HPP dalam rancangan KUHAP. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa praktik perluasan kewenangan praperadilan dapat dipahami sebagai upaya kekuasaan yudisial menguji keabsahan upaya paksa yang dilakukan oleh penyidik. Meskipun demikian, dengan kewenangan yang masih terbatas dan sifatnya yang pasif, praperadilan dipandang kurang efektif dalam mengawasi upaya paksa yang dilakukan aparat penegak hukum.

The law and politics of United States foreign policy export controls

One of the few areas of the law in which there is a significant and serious dispute between the United States and its Western Allies concerns the nature and scope of national regulation of international trade. This long-standing and mutually damaging dispute first arose in connection with the extraterritorial enforcement of US antitrust laws through the effects doctrine as elaborated by US courts commencing with the Alcoa case in 1945. Since then the dispute has progressively widened and deepened: it has extended to such matters as international shipping and civil aviation, commodity markets and securities and it has been aggravated by the extraterritorial application of US investigatory and other pretrial procedure.