по-русски

Actual Problems of
Economics and Law

 

16+

 

DOI: 10.21202/1993-047X.11.2017.1.152-159

скачать PDF

Authors :
1. Timur A. Gumerov, PhD (Law), Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure and Court Performanceof Elabuga Institute; Head of the Department of the Committee for Economic Development
Kazan (Volga) Federal University; Apparatus of Executive Committee of Kazan



Mechanism of indictment. Problems, theory and practice


Objective: to determine the stages of the mechanism of pre-trial adoption of indictment, to identify the main mistakes made when making an indictment, and offer ways of their elimination.


Methods: logical, comparative-legal, normative-logical and statistical, as well as the method of complex study of phenomena and processes of legal reality.


Results: within the framework of the proposed mechanism of pre-judicial indictment adoption, and basing on the analysis of 45 indictments and their receipts in various categories of cases, the common errors were identified of the subjects of criminal procedural law involved in the mechanism of indictment preparation and adoption. These include: the presence of smudges, underlined places and erasures in the text of the indictment; the discrepancy between the indictment and the charges set out in the resolution on impleading of a defendant; confusion referred to the approval
of the indictment by the head of the investigative body, etc. Therefore, it is proposed to supplement Part 1 of Article 39 of the Russian Criminal-Procedural Code with paragraph 9.1. "To agree on the indictment after its signing by the investigator", to extend the term of preliminary investigation and to assign additional days for the indictment approval, to put into practice the meeting of all actors of the criminal process involved in the mechanism of the indictment adoption, in order to analyze the quality and completeness of the investigation, typical investigation errors and violations of criminal-procedural legislation.


Scientific novelty: as a result of the study, frequent errors arising from the adoption of the indictment were identified, occurring since the end of the preliminary investigation with indictment till the adoption of the criminal case with the indictment by the court; suggestions on avoiding them were formulated.


Practical significance: the main provisions and conclusions of the article can be used in scientific and teaching activities, in addressing the issues related to the mechanism of the indictment preparation and adoption.


Keywords :

Criminal law and criminology; Criminal procedure; Indictment; Investigator; Head of investigative body; Prosecutor; Preliminary investigation; Coordination of indictment; Approval of indictment


Bibliography :

1. Solov'ev, S. A. Procedural value of indictment at the modern stage (practical aspect), Advokatskaya praktika, 2016, No. 1, pp. 28–33 (in Russ.).
2. Kalinkina, L. D. Violations of the Russian criminal-Procedural Code when forming an indictment, Advokat, 2013, No. 7, pp. 37–47 (in Russ.).
3. Vladykina, T. A. Violation of the defendant’s right for defense during indictment, Ugolovnoe pravo, 2015, No. 6, pp. 80–85 (in Russ.).
4. Isaenko, V. N. Prosecutor’s actions in criminal cases on bribery submitted with an indictment, Zakonnost', 2013, No. 3, pp. 25–29 (in Russ.).
5. Garmaev, Yu. P. Checking the content of accusation contained in the indictment, and recommendations for forming the draft of indictment, Administrator suda, 2013, No. 3, pp. 29–33 (in Russ.).
6. Alimamedov, E. N. Tasks and essence of the final stage of preliminary investigation with indictment, Rossiiskii sud'ya, 2011, No. 10, pp. 21–24 (in Russ.).
7. Vasyaev, A. A. On the impermissibility of copying the evidences contained in the indictment into the court sentence, Advokat, 2013, No. 3, pp. 25–28 (in Russ.).
8. Gumerov, T. A. Indictment: legal nature, content, procedural consequences, Moscow: Yurlitinform, 2011. 216 p. (in Russ.).
9. Theses of the report of the Chairman of Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation Aleksandr Bastrykin at the session of Public and Consultative Councils of Investigation Committee of 24 April 2014, available at: http://www.sledcom.ru/actual/397382/ (access date: 28.04.2014) (in Russ.).
10. Boil'ke, V. Criminal-procedural law of Federal Republic of Germany: textbook, 6-e izd., dop. i izm.; per. s nem. Ya. M. Ploshkinoi; ed. L. V. Maiorovа, Krasnoyarsk: RUMTs YuO, 2004, 352 s. (in Russ.).
11. Butov, V. N. Criminal procedure of the modern foreign countries (Great Britain, USA, France, FRG and Austria): textbook, Chelyabinsk: REKPOL, 2008, p. 29 (in Russ.).
12. Bezlepkin, B. T. Brief tutorial for an investigator, Moscow: Prospekt, 2011, 161 p. (in Russ.).
13. Borisevich, G. Ya. On essential, unremovable, fundamental violations of law as the grounds of cancellation or change of court decisions in criminal cases, Vestnik Permskogo universiteta, Yuridicheskie nauki, 2013, No. 2, pp. 199–210 (in Russ.).
14. Kostovskaya, N. V. Role of proof in making a decision of a special order of a case consideration, Rossiiskii sledovatel', 2015, No. 23, pp. 6–9 (in Russ.).
15. Biryukov N. I., Vedernikova O. N., Vorozhtsov S. A. at al. Comment to the decrees of the Russian Supreme Court Plenum on criminal cases, ed. V. M. Lebedev, 3-e izd., pererab. i dop., Moscow: NORMA, 2014, 816 p. (in Russ.).
16. Aristarkhov, A. Issues of returning a case by the court to a prosecutor in order to eliminate the obstacles for its consideration by accusation of a harder crime, Ugolovnoe pravo, 2014, No. 1, pp. 93–98 (in Russ.).
17. Sheifer, S. A. Preliminary investigation in Russia: to eliminate or to improve?, Ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo, 2015, No. 3, pp. 8–15 (in Russ.).

18. Antonovich, E. K., Artamonova, E. A., Velikii, D. P. at al. Criminal-Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. Chapters 1–32.1. By-article scientific-practical comment, otv. red. L. A. Voskobitova, Moscow: Redaktsiya Rossiiskoi gazety, 2015, is. III–IV, 911 p. (in Russ.).
19. Karetnikov, A. S., Koretnikov, S. A. Essence of authorities of a prosecutor in monitoring the preliminary investigation: past and present, Rossiiskaya yustitsiya, 2015, No. 5, pp. 49–52 (in Russ.).
20. Zimenkov, A. A. Returning of a criminal case by a prosecutor to an investigator: old institution with new problems, Rossiiskii sledovatel', 2012, No. 4, pp. 5–8 (in Russ.).
21. Bagmet, A. M. Role of an investigator in stating the objective truth when investigating crimes, Rossiiskii sledovatel', 2013, No. 16, pp. 4–7 (in Russ.).
22. Mironov, V. Yu. Validity of proofs and their significance when resolving a verdict, Orenburg: Izdatel'skii tsentr OGAU, 2006, pp. 145–146 (in Russ.).
23. Gataullin, Z. Elaborating the position in a criminal case and organizing a state accusation, Zakonnost', 2008, No. 11, p. 18 (in Russ.).
24. Kil'chitskii, I. F. Grounds for organization and implementing the preliminary hearings in a criminal case in a military court. Some issues of court practice, Pravo v Vooruzhennykh Silakh, 2013, No. 6, pp. 63–75 (in Russ.).
25. Rudnev, V. I. Some issues of returning of a criminal case to a prosecutor for eliminating obstacles for it investigating by court, Comment of a court practice, ed. K. B. Yaroshenko, Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura, 2011, is. 16, pp. 292–300 (in Russ.).


Citation :

Gumerov T.A. Mechanism of indictment. Problems, theory and practice, Actual Problems of Economics and Law, 2017, vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 152–159 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.21202/1993-047X.11.2017.1.152-159


Type of article : The scientific article

Date of receipt of the article :
16.06.2016

Date of adoption of the print :
10.10.2016

Date of online accommodation :
20.03.2017