行政立法中违反无罪推定的问题:证据评估问题

Irina V. Volkova, A. Deryuga
{"title":"行政立法中违反无罪推定的问题:证据评估问题","authors":"Irina V. Volkova, A. Deryuga","doi":"10.24158/pep.2023.12.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The analysis of the legal regulation of the evaluation of evidence in administrative legislation, as well as the practice of its application in the administrative and jurisdictional process leads to the conclusion about its im-perfection. For this reason, the principle of presumption of innocence does not always serve as a guarantee of protection of rights and legitimate interests of citizens brought to administrative responsibility. Frequently, judg-es and bodies of relevant jurisdiction, considering cases on administrative offenses, evaluate evidence at their discretion, ignoring the meaning of the said principle – to compensate for the difference of knowledge of the right of the accusing and accused parties. This leads to legal liability of citizens for unproven unlawful facts. The circumstance causing the relevance of the raised issue is the complexity of the implementation of the prin-ciple of presumption of innocence in administrative-jurisdictional process, associated with the order of evalua-tion of evidence on the basis of the norms of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences. Attention is drawn to the imperfection of administrative legislation in terms of the procedure for evaluating evi-dence and the need for amendments and additions to the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, by legislating the definitions of “criterion of evidence” (relevance, admissibility, sufficiency and reliability) and “cri-terion for evaluating evidence”.","PeriodicalId":507515,"journal":{"name":"Общество: политика, экономика, право","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Violation of the Presumption of Innocence in Administrative Legislation: Problems of Evaluation of Evidence\",\"authors\":\"Irina V. Volkova, A. Deryuga\",\"doi\":\"10.24158/pep.2023.12.22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The analysis of the legal regulation of the evaluation of evidence in administrative legislation, as well as the practice of its application in the administrative and jurisdictional process leads to the conclusion about its im-perfection. For this reason, the principle of presumption of innocence does not always serve as a guarantee of protection of rights and legitimate interests of citizens brought to administrative responsibility. Frequently, judg-es and bodies of relevant jurisdiction, considering cases on administrative offenses, evaluate evidence at their discretion, ignoring the meaning of the said principle – to compensate for the difference of knowledge of the right of the accusing and accused parties. This leads to legal liability of citizens for unproven unlawful facts. The circumstance causing the relevance of the raised issue is the complexity of the implementation of the prin-ciple of presumption of innocence in administrative-jurisdictional process, associated with the order of evalua-tion of evidence on the basis of the norms of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences. Attention is drawn to the imperfection of administrative legislation in terms of the procedure for evaluating evi-dence and the need for amendments and additions to the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, by legislating the definitions of “criterion of evidence” (relevance, admissibility, sufficiency and reliability) and “cri-terion for evaluating evidence”.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507515,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Общество: политика, экономика, право\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Общество: политика, экономика, право\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24158/pep.2023.12.22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Общество: политика, экономика, право","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24158/pep.2023.12.22","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

通过对行政立法中有关证据评估的法律规定及其在行政和司法程序中的应用实践进行分析,可以得出其不完善的结论。因此,"无罪推定 "原则并不总能保障被追究行政责任的公民的权利和合法利益。法官和相关司法机构在审理行政违法案件时,经常会随意评估证据,忽视上述原则的意义--弥补原告和被告对权利认识的差异。这导致公民对未经证实的非法事实承担法律责任。导致所提问题具有现实意义的情况是,在行政司法程序中执行无罪推定原则的复杂性,这与根据《俄 罗斯联邦行政违法法典》的规范评估证据的顺序有关。提请注意行政立法在证据评估程序方面的不完善,以及通过立法确定 "证据标准"(相关性、可采 性、充分性和可靠性)和 "证据评估标准 "的定义对《俄罗斯联邦行政法典》进行修正和补充的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Violation of the Presumption of Innocence in Administrative Legislation: Problems of Evaluation of Evidence
The analysis of the legal regulation of the evaluation of evidence in administrative legislation, as well as the practice of its application in the administrative and jurisdictional process leads to the conclusion about its im-perfection. For this reason, the principle of presumption of innocence does not always serve as a guarantee of protection of rights and legitimate interests of citizens brought to administrative responsibility. Frequently, judg-es and bodies of relevant jurisdiction, considering cases on administrative offenses, evaluate evidence at their discretion, ignoring the meaning of the said principle – to compensate for the difference of knowledge of the right of the accusing and accused parties. This leads to legal liability of citizens for unproven unlawful facts. The circumstance causing the relevance of the raised issue is the complexity of the implementation of the prin-ciple of presumption of innocence in administrative-jurisdictional process, associated with the order of evalua-tion of evidence on the basis of the norms of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences. Attention is drawn to the imperfection of administrative legislation in terms of the procedure for evaluating evi-dence and the need for amendments and additions to the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, by legislating the definitions of “criterion of evidence” (relevance, admissibility, sufficiency and reliability) and “cri-terion for evaluating evidence”.
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
期刊最新文献
Personal Interest in Russian Law: Issues of Conceptualization Improving the Efficiency of Securities Market Operations amid Economic Turbulence German Energy Neocolonialism in the Sub-Saharan States Administrative Reforms as a Solution for Building Democracy in Modern Vietnam Modern Political Myths and Pseudo-Myths in the Aspect of the Theory of Ethnogenesis
×
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