по-русски

Actual Problems of
Economics and Law

 

16+

 

DOI: 10.21202/1993-047X.09.2015.4.273-278

скачать PDF

Authors :
1. Oksana V. Kachalova, PhD (Law), Associate Professor
Russian State University for Justice, Moscow, Russia



Object of checking the judgments at law made at special trials, by the reviewing court


Objective: to determine the features of the subject of cassation court the proceedings in relation to criminal cases considered by the first instance court in a special order of judicial proceedings, and on this basis to define the ways of forming the effective mechanism of judicial protection of the rights and freedoms of participants in criminal proceedings whose interests are affected by adjudication in a special order.

Methods: general scientific dialectical method and specific scientific methods of cognition: systemic, structural functional, formal logical methods (analysis, synthesis, concretization, analogy, simulation).

Results: basing on the analysis of the criminal procedure law norms and practice, the author concludes that the available procedural tools allow to correct the errors of lower courts only by assessing the violations as violations of the law. It is concluded that the rule of law cannot be considered the sole subject of litigation in the court of cassation. Voluntary refusal of the accused from the full-fledged trial procedure and court procedure for establishing the facts of the case cannot determine the absence of a mechanism to eliminate judicial error in such categories of cases. The need to protect the rights and freedoms of the individual regardless of the procedural form of the proceedings and other circumstances implies the existence of effective procedural means.

Scientific novelty: for the first time in the article it is concluded that in cases reviewed in special judicial proceedings, the need for parity of judicial protection ideas, which allows to correct errors made during the resolution of the criminal case, and for the principle of finality of judgments (res judicata), is not obvious.

Practical significance: the main provisions and conclusions of the article can be used to improve the norms of the criminal procedural law, in research activities, in teaching and studying of criminal procedural law.
 


Keywords :

special order of judicial proceedings; court of cassation; judicial proceedings; grounds for cancellation of court decisions; sentence


Bibliography :

1. Kachalova, O. V. Kassatsionnoe proizvodstvo: puti optimizatsii (Cassation procedure: ways of optimization) // Ugolovnyi protsess, 2014, no. 5, pp. 20–23.
2. Voskobitova, L. A. Konstitutsionnye osnovy apellyatsii v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve (Constitutional bases of appeal in criminal legal procedures) // Aktual'nye problemy rossiiskogo prava, 2013, no. 12, pp. 1619–1624.
3. Lezhe, R. Velikie pravovye sistemy sovremennosti (Great legal systems of today). M.: Volters Kluver, 2009, 529 p.
4. Golovko, L. V. Novelly UPK RF: progress ili institutsional'nyi khaos? (Novels of the Russian Criminal-Procedural Code: progress or institutional chaos?) // Apellyatsiya, kassatsiya, nadzor: novelly GPK RF, UPK RF. Pervyi opyt kriticheskogo osmysleniya / pod obshch. red. N. A. Kolokolova. M.: Yurist, 2011, 187 p.
5. Patsatsiya, M. Sh. Effektivnost' protsessual'noi deyatel'nosti proverochnykh instantsii arbitrazhnogo suda (Efficiency of procedural activity of reviewing instances of arbitrage): avtoref. dis. ... d-ra yurid. nauk. M., 2010. Available at: http://disser.law.edu.ru (accessed date: 20.09.15).
6. Ashirbekova, M. T. Vliyanie printsipa pravovoi opredelennosti na postroenie sistem sudebno-poverochnogo proizvodstva UUS i UPK RF (Impact of the principle of legal certainty on the construction of court-reviewing procedure systems in UUS and the Russian Criminal-Procedural Code) // Ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo, 2014, no. 3, pp. 6–10.
7. Kuvaldina, Yu. V. Obzhalovanie prigovorov, postanovlennykh v osobom poryadke: nastoyashchee i budushchee (Appealing against sentences made by a special order: present and future) // Ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo, 2011, no. 3, pp. 14–15.
8. Potapov, V. D. O kolliziyakh v predmete kassatsionnoi i nadzornoi proverki okonchatel'nykh aktov suda (On collisions in the object of cassation and supervisory reviews of the final court acts) // Rossiiskii sledovatel', 2012, no. 18, pp. 19–20.
9. Borodinova, T. G. Teoreticheskie i pravovye osnovy formirovaniya instituta peresmotra prigovorov v ugolovno-protsessual'nom prave Rossii (Theoretical and legal bases of forming the institution of sentences’ reviewing in the Russian criminal-procedural law). M., 2014, 288 p.
10. Poletaeva, A. V. Novyi vzglyad zakonodatelya na narushenie UPK RF kak na osnovanie k otmene ili izmeneniyu prigovora (New outlook of a legislator on the Russian Criminal-Procedural Code violation as the grounds to cancel or change the sentence) // Rossiiskii sledovatel', 2012, no. 20, pp. 14–16.
 


Citation :

Kachalova O. V. Object of checking the judgments at law made at special trials, by the reviewing court // Actual Problems of Economics and Law, 2015, no. 4, pp. 273–278.
 


Type of article : The scientific article

Date of receipt of the article :
29.09.2015

Date of adoption of the print :
02.11.2015

Date of online accommodation :
15.01.2016