Institute of bringing as an accused: on the “deprocessualization” and “dematerialization” of its essence and content in the criminal proceedings of Russia

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

This work critically assesses the legal nature and practice of the institution of bringing as a defendant in criminal proceedings in Russia, particularly in its relation to the substantive legal act of bringing to criminal responsibility. The author argues that, due to the general bureaucratization of the process, both the first and second acts have actually lost their original purpose to be the determining material and procedural guarantee of individual and justice in criminal proceedings. Objectifying as a legal fiction, the act of bringing the accused as an accused in the doctrine of Russian criminal procedure law, done directly in practice, is increasingly characterized as an accusation of “duty,” “initial,” “intermediate,” and “final”, which respectively form the ideas of “duty,” “intermediate,” “initial, “and “investigative-final“ criminal prosecution. This negates the role of the named defining acts. Hence, the paper suggests an optimal mechanism for their implementation according to the purposes and tasks of substantive and procedural law

About the authors

Nikolay N. Kovtun

Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia

Author for correspondence.
Email: kovtunnnov@mail.ru

Doctor of law, professor, professor of the department of criminal procedure

Russian Federation, Nizhny Novgorod

References

  1. Makalinsky P.V. A practical guide for district court investigators. Vol. 1. Saint Petersburg: N.K. Martynov, 1907. 1327 p. (In Russ.).
  2. Gavrilov B.Ya. Myths and realities of modern pre-trial proceedings: the opinion of a scientist and practice. In: Criminal Proceedings of Russia: Current Status and Development Prospects: Materials of All-Russian. scientific-practical conf. (April 18–19, 2019). Krasnodar: Krasnodar University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 2019. P. 60-64. (In Russ.).
  3. Alexandrov A.I. Ensuring the right of the accused (suspect) to be protected in the criminal process of Russia: actual problems. Russian investigator. 2019;(8):15-18. (In Russ.).
  4. Smirnov A.V. Appeal to a court of an illegal or unreasonable decision to bring a person as an accused (prepared for ConsultantPlus). URL: http://www.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc&base=CJI&n=37945#011386233650826283 (Accessed: 20.04.2020). (In Russ.).
  5. Vinogradov V.A. A review of the disciplinary practice of the chambers of law. Criminal Procedure. 2020;(2):20-21. (In Russ.).
  6. Gavrilov B.Ya. Indictment: current status and enforcement issues. Institute Herald: crime, punishment, correction. 2010;(10):38-40. (In Russ.).
  7. Chabukiani O.A. The indictment institute needs to be abolished. Bulletin of the Russian Law Academy. 2014;(3):51-54. (In Russ.).
  8. Kovtun N.N. Formation of public prosecution as an independent stage of criminal proceedings in Russia. Journal of Russian Law. 2019;(9):123-137. (In Russ.).
  9. Gavrilov B.Ya. Indictment: theory and practice. Criminal proceedings: theory and practice. Moscow: Yurayt, 2011. P. 470‒480. (In Russ.).

Copyright (c) 2020 Kovtun N.N.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies