COUNTERING THE VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF ADVERSARIAL PARTIES IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

Danil S. Ilin
{"title":"COUNTERING THE VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF ADVERSARIAL PARTIES IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS","authors":"Danil S. Ilin","doi":"10.33693/2072-3164-2022-15-5-404-412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the results of a study of the problem of overcoming violations of the principle of adversarial parties, in particular, the right of the defense party to present evidence and attach them to the case materials and its provision with criminal procedural means. The right of the defense party to participate in the process of proving equally with the prosecution is ensured by the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal procedure and criminal legislation, regardless of the stage of procedural activity, as well as the attitude to the proceedings. The right to judicial protection is not only the right to appeal to the court, but also the possibility of obtaining real judicial protection by restoring violated rights and freedoms, which must be provided by the state in accordance with the criteria of efficiency and fairness. The constitutional principles of justice arising from Articles 19 (Parts 1 and 2), 46 (Parts 1 and 2), 47 (Part 1) and 123 (Part 3) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation presuppose both strict adherence to the procedure of criminal proceedings, and the timeliness and effectiveness of protecting the rights and legitimate interests of not only the accused, but also persons suspected of committing a crime. Unfortunately, investigators and interrogators often deny the defense the right to present evidence and attach it to a criminal case, while taking advantage of loopholes in legislation and vague (sometimes too broad) interpretations in the governing acts of judicial interpretation. This leads to the fact that there is no alternative to the prosecution's version and, of course, to a significant violation of the rights of the accused as participants in criminal proceedings. The negative consequences of this may be cases of unjustified accusation and conviction of innocent persons, the occurrence of other grave consequences (for example, the illness of an illegally accused /convicted person, causing property damage during the confiscation of property based on a false accusation, the application of other property sanctions, discrediting and defamation of such a person, etc.). In addition, of course, this practice it causes serious damage to the authority of the court, law enforcement agencies, and the formation of negative public opinion about them. The article analyzes in detail the cases of refusals to submit and attach evidence, examines the \"argumentation\" given by the staff of the preliminary investigation bodies, judges, and clearly proves its fallacy, using the example of cases that have a great public resonance and the author's personal experience as a lawyer in such cases. Criminal procedural means of countering such violations are being investigated. In conclusion, based on the conducted research, the author formulates a conclusion aimed at overcoming the accusatory bias and violations of the rights of participants in court proceedings in cases with public resonance, improving and increasing the effectiveness of preventing violations of the constitutional right to defense and adversarial parties.","PeriodicalId":446864,"journal":{"name":"Gaps in Russian Legislation","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaps in Russian Legislation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33693/2072-3164-2022-15-5-404-412","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

The article presents the results of a study of the problem of overcoming violations of the principle of adversarial parties, in particular, the right of the defense party to present evidence and attach them to the case materials and its provision with criminal procedural means. The right of the defense party to participate in the process of proving equally with the prosecution is ensured by the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal procedure and criminal legislation, regardless of the stage of procedural activity, as well as the attitude to the proceedings. The right to judicial protection is not only the right to appeal to the court, but also the possibility of obtaining real judicial protection by restoring violated rights and freedoms, which must be provided by the state in accordance with the criteria of efficiency and fairness. The constitutional principles of justice arising from Articles 19 (Parts 1 and 2), 46 (Parts 1 and 2), 47 (Part 1) and 123 (Part 3) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation presuppose both strict adherence to the procedure of criminal proceedings, and the timeliness and effectiveness of protecting the rights and legitimate interests of not only the accused, but also persons suspected of committing a crime. Unfortunately, investigators and interrogators often deny the defense the right to present evidence and attach it to a criminal case, while taking advantage of loopholes in legislation and vague (sometimes too broad) interpretations in the governing acts of judicial interpretation. This leads to the fact that there is no alternative to the prosecution's version and, of course, to a significant violation of the rights of the accused as participants in criminal proceedings. The negative consequences of this may be cases of unjustified accusation and conviction of innocent persons, the occurrence of other grave consequences (for example, the illness of an illegally accused /convicted person, causing property damage during the confiscation of property based on a false accusation, the application of other property sanctions, discrediting and defamation of such a person, etc.). In addition, of course, this practice it causes serious damage to the authority of the court, law enforcement agencies, and the formation of negative public opinion about them. The article analyzes in detail the cases of refusals to submit and attach evidence, examines the "argumentation" given by the staff of the preliminary investigation bodies, judges, and clearly proves its fallacy, using the example of cases that have a great public resonance and the author's personal experience as a lawyer in such cases. Criminal procedural means of countering such violations are being investigated. In conclusion, based on the conducted research, the author formulates a conclusion aimed at overcoming the accusatory bias and violations of the rights of participants in court proceedings in cases with public resonance, improving and increasing the effectiveness of preventing violations of the constitutional right to defense and adversarial parties.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
反对刑事诉讼中违反当事人对抗原则的行为
本文介绍了对克服违反对抗性当事人原则问题的研究结果,特别是对辩护方出示证据并附在案件材料上的权利及其刑事诉讼手段的规定进行了研究。辩护方与控方平等参与举证过程的权利受到俄罗斯联邦宪法、刑事诉讼程序和刑事立法的规定的保障,无论诉讼活动的阶段如何,以及对诉讼的态度如何。司法保护权不仅是向法院申诉的权利,而且是通过恢复被侵犯的权利和自由而获得真正的司法保护的可能性,这必须由国家按照效率和公平的标准提供。《俄罗斯联邦宪法》第19条(第1和第2部分)、第46条(第1和第2部分)、第47条(第1部分)和第123条(第3部分)所产生的宪法性司法原则的先决条件是严格遵守刑事诉讼程序,并及时和有效地保护不仅被告而且涉嫌犯罪的人的权利和合法利益。不幸的是,调查人员和审讯人员常常利用立法漏洞和司法解释的管辖行为中模糊(有时过于宽泛)的解释,否认辩方提供证据的权利,并将其与刑事案件联系起来。这导致这样一个事实,即除了控方的说法之外没有其他选择,当然也严重侵犯了被告作为刑事诉讼参与者的权利。这种情况的消极后果可能是无辜者受到不合理的指控和定罪,发生其他严重后果(例如,被非法指控/定罪的人患病,在根据诬告没收财产期间造成财产损失,适用其他财产制裁,诋毁和诽谤这类人,等等)。此外,当然,这种做法也严重损害了法院、执法机构的权威,并形成了对它们的负面舆论。本文以具有较大社会反响的案件为例,结合笔者在这类案件中担任律师的亲身经历,对拒绝提交证据案件进行了详细分析,对初审机关工作人员、法官的“论证”进行了检验,并明确论证了其谬误。目前正在调查打击这种违法行为的刑事诉讼手段。最后,在已有研究的基础上,笔者提出了一个结论,旨在克服在具有公众共鸣的案件中存在的指控偏见和对诉讼参与人权利的侵犯,改善和提高防止宪法辩护权和对抗性当事人受到侵犯的有效性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY IN MODERN REALITIES: PUBLIC-LEGAL AND PRIVATE LEGAL ASPECTS SCIENTIFIC AND METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE CREATION OF A DATA MATRIX AS A PRIORITY INSTRUMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE «SINGLE WINDOW» MECHANISM IN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION CTP INSURANCE IN THE LEGAL ASPECT: NEW APPROACHES AND PROSPECTS CATEGORIES OF «SUFFICIENCY» AND «MERIT» WHEN DECIDING ON THE RELEASE OF A PERSON FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY ON EVALUATIVE GROUNDS PROBLEMS OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND PROTECTION OF FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN OF MOBILIZED CITIZENS
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1