THE TRUTH AS A GROUND FOR THE DIFFERENTIATION OF A FORM OF ACTION


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The paper considers the question of the role and nature of the truth in criminal procedure, in respect of which the arguments continue at present in the theory of criminal procedure law. However, the changes of fundamental principles of the criminal proceeding under the influence of the introduction of the adversarial principle and the principle of presumption of innocence in it cause the revision of the traditional wisdom both about the goal of criminal procedure and the ways of its achievement.

The differentiation of form of action is initially the differentiation of the goals and the proof proceeding based on the principle of presumption of innocence making the goals, rules and the result of evidence conditional on the position of a defendant. The differentiation of criminally-remedial form of action involves both the differences in the standards of proof and in the criteria of evaluation of a sentence as well. Based on the specified approach, the author formulates the proposals aimed at the overcoming of theoretic differences by standardization of the results of the criminally-remedial activities.

Despite the absence of the whole picture of reasons for the differentiation of criminally-remedial form, two relatively independent systems of criminal proceedings have been formed in Russia by now. As a major criterion that allows selecting the form of action efficient for a certain case, it is offered to consider the goal of the criminal proceeding – reaching the truth or compromise – depending on the position of a defendant. In the result of the study, the author makes the conclusion on how the differentiation of forms of action influences the implementation of the criminal proceeding principles. The paper shows that the modern system of criminal proceeding of Russia cannot be described without simplified procedures.

About the authors

Valentina Aleksandrovna Lazareva

Academician S.P. Korolev Samara National Research University, Samara

Author for correspondence.
Email: v.a.lazareva@mail.ru

Doctor of Sciences (Law), professor of Chair of Criminal Procedure and Criminal Science of Academician S.P. Korolev Samara National Research University, Samara (RF) 

Russian Federation

References

  1. Smirnov A.V. Formalnye sredstva dokazyvaniya v ugolovnom prave i protsesse [Formal evidentiary facts in criminal law and procedure]. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2018. 240 p.
  2. RF. Draft federal law “On amendments being made to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the introduction of the institute of establishment of objective truth in a criminal case”. (In Russian)
  3. Bocharov T.Yu., Volkov V.V., Voskobitova L.A., Dmitrieva A.V., Smola A.A., Titaev K.D., Tsvetkov I.V. Predlozheniya po sovershenstvovaniyu sudebnoy sistemy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii i izmeneniya normativnykh aktov v tselyakh ikh realizatsii [The proposals for improving the judicial system in the Russian Federation and the amendments of normative acts with the purpose of their implementation]. Moscow, TsSR Publ., 2018. 116 p.
  4. Aleksandrov A.S. Criticism of the objective truth concept in criminal procedure. Ugolovnyy protsess, 2012, no. 6, pp. 66–73.
  5. Strogovich M.S. Materialnaya istina i sudebnye dokazatelstva v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse [The material truth and judicial evidence in the Soviet criminal process]. Moscow, AN SSSR Publ., 1955. 384 p.
  6. Kolokolov N.A., ed. Teoriya ugolovnogo protsessa: sostyazatelnost [The theory of criminal process: competitiveness]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2013. Ch. 1, 368 p.
  7. Kolokolov N.A., ed. Teoriya ugolovnogo protsessa: prezumptsii i preyuditsii [The theory of the criminal procedure: presumptions and prejudices]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2012. 496 p.
  8. Vetrova G.N. To the question of differentiation of the criminal procedural from of pre-trial proceedings. Gosudarstvo i pravo, 2015, no. 3, pp. 37–50.
  9. Trubnikova T.V. Limitations to criminal procedure simplification. Aktualnye problemy rossiyskogo prava, 2015, no. 12, pp. 131–139.
  10. Yakulin V. Simplified forms of proceedings in the criminal procedure legislation of Slovenia. Problemy ukrepleniya zakonnosti i pravoporyadka: nauka, praktika, tendentsii, 2013, no. 6, pp. 387–395.
  11. Dolya E.A. On the question of the truth in criminal proceedings of Russia. Rossiyskiy sledovatel, 2011, no. 22, pp. 9–13.
  12. Dolya E.A. The problems of truth in contemporary criminal proceedings. Sovremennye problemy razvitiya ugolovnogo protsessa, kriminalistiki, operativno-rozysknoy deyatelnosti: sbornik trudov konferentsii. Moscow, Akademiya Generalnoy prokuratury RF Publ., 2013, pp. 9–12.
  13. Alekseev N.S., Daev V.G., Kokarev L.D. Ocherk razvitiya nauki sovetskogo ugolovnogo protsessa [Essay on the Development of the Soviet criminal procedure science]. Voronezh, Voronezh. un-t Publ., 1980. 252 p.
  14. Zhogin N.V., ed. Teoriya dokazatelstv v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse [The theory of evidence in the Soviet criminal trial]. 2nd ed., ispr. i dop. Moscow, Yurid. lit. Publ., 1973. 736 p.
  15. Rozin N.N. Ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo [Criminal proceedings]. 2nd ed., izm. i dop. Sankt Petersburg, Izd. yurid. kn. sklada «Pravo» Publ., 1914. 603 p.
  16. Dukhovskoy M.V. Russkiy ugolovnyy protsess [Russian criminal trial]. Moscow, Tip. A.P. Poplavskogo Publ., 1908. 288 p.
  17. Statute of Criminal Procedure of 1864. Klassika Rossiyskogo prava. URL: civil.consultant.ru/sudeb_ustav/.
  18. Kuvaldina Yu.V. Kompromiss kak sposob razresheniya ugolovno-pravovykh konfliktov v Rossii [Compromise as a method of resolution of criminal legal conflicts in Russia]. Moscow, Yustitsiya Publ., 2016. 252 p.
  19. Murashkin I.Yu. The Truth in Criminal Proceedings. Vestnik Omskogo yuridicheskogo institute, 2011, no. 3, pp. 54–56.
  20. Libus I.A. Prezumptsiya nevinovnosti v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse [Presumption of innocence in Soviet criminal procedure]. Tashkent, Uzbekistan Publ., 1981. 136 p.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

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

About Cookies