Implementation problems in criminal procedure the principles of equality and adversarial (for example, the possibility of filing by the defense of expert's opinion)

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Background: The European criminal law system declares principles of competition and equality of parties as fundamental to ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The domestic legal system also contains these concepts, but only the principle of competition, which includes equality, is declared as a fundamental principle. Such a seemingly insignificant difference in systems causes difficulties in implementing these principles in criminal proceedings, which is shown by the example of using special knowledge in the form of expert opinion and interrogation, and those few tools for the defense that can be used for qualified opposition by the prosecution, which builds its system of evidence on the expert’s conclusion. Vividly, implementation contradictions in the criminal process principles of equality and competition occur with the use of one of the parties (mostly by the defense) specialized knowledge in the form of imprisonment and interrogation specialist. Aims: This study aimed to analyze the problematic issues that arise in this case. Conclusion: Results of the study show the need for practical development and greater legal significance to the institution of participation of a specialist in criminal proceedings, both directly and separately through a written opinion, which meets not only the principles of modern improvement of the implementation of constitutional guarantees for justice, court access, and obtaining professional legal assistance, but also the provisions on the right to a fair trial, provided for in art. Six conventions for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms ETS N 005 (Rome, 4 November 1950) are ratified by the Russian Federation on March 30, 1998.

About the authors

Alexander P. Bozhchenko

Military medical academy of S.M. Kirov; Bureau of forensic medical examination

Email: bozhchenko@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7841-0913
SPIN-code: 1110-0515

Dr. Sci. (Med.), Assoc. Prof.

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Sergei L. Semenov

Military medical academy of S.M. Kirov

Email: sem5263@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0938-8454
SPIN-code: 4631-7343

Cand. Sci (Med.), Assoc. Prof.

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Igor M. Nikitin

Saint Petersburg city bar Association

Email: nikitin@apspb.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7012-2172
SPIN-code: 1456-9588

Cand. Sci (Jur.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Yuri V. Nazarov

Bureau of forensic medical examination; North-Western State Medical University named aft er I.I. Mechnikov

Author for correspondence.
Email: naz532@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4629-4521
SPIN-code: 2390-8227

Dr. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

References

  1. Altynnikova LI. Competitiveness and equality of the parties in criminal appeal proceedings as elements of the concept of fair trial: the position of the European court of human rights. Actual problems of Russian law. 2016;9(70):122–130. (In Russ).
  2. Kovler AI. Results of the European court of human rights in 2011. Russian Judge. 2012;(4):6–14. (In Russ).
  3. Darovsky SM. Some controversial issues implementation of the principle of competition in the court of first instance. Right. 2008;128(28):37–42. (In Russ).
  4. Bozhchenko AP. Categorical conclusions and their validity in the conclusions of forensic medical examinations in cases of professional offenses of medical workers. Medical Law. 2020;(3):14–20. (In Russ).
  5. Bozhchenko AP, Gugnin IV, Ismailov MT, Nikitin IM. Criminal-legal and expert-criminalistic aspects of assessment of professional offenses of medical workers. Bulletin of the Russian military medical Academy. 2019;68(4):156–161. (In Russ).
  6. Bozhchenko AP, Ismailov MT, Nikitin IM. Crime composition as a factor determining the circumstances to be proved and the subject of forensic medical examination in cases of violations of medical workers. Medical Law. 2018;(2):7–11. (In Russ).
  7. Burmagin SV. Conformity of the sentence to the judge’s inner conviction. Siberian criminal procedure and criminalistic readings. 2017;15(1):13–20. (In Russ).
  8. Gorevoy ED. Internal judicial conviction in the evaluation of evidence in criminal cases. Abstract journal. Social Sciences and Humanities. Russian and foreign literature. Series 4: State and law. 2009;(3):146–147. (In Russ).
  9. Khorosheva AE. Problems of implementing the principle of competition in a jury trial. Right. 2010;66(2-1):101–104. (In Russ).
  10. Al’shevskii VV. Activities of forensic experts and specialists in the new version of article 159 of the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation. Nauchno-prakticheskaya konferentsiya “Sudebnaya medicina: voprosy, problemy, ekspertnaya praktika”, 2017 oct. 18–20. Novosibirsk; 2017. Р. 10–14. (In Russ).
  11. Fomin MA. Problems of proof in court with the participation of jurors. Criminal proceedings. 2009;(1):33–38. (In Russ).
  12. Lupinskaya PA. Decisions in criminal proceedings: theory, legislation, practice. Moscow: Norma; 2010. (In Russ).
  13. Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 55 of November 29, 2016 «O sudebnom prigovore». (In Russ). Available from: https://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/doc/71451272/
  14. Trunov I, Trunova L. The Court does not have to produce evidence. The Russian Justice. 2001;(9):56. (In Russ).

Copyright (c) 2021 Bozhchenko A.P., Semenov S.L., Nikitin I.M., Nazarov Y.V.

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

This website uses cookies

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

About Cookies