Expediency as the Principle and Grounds for Decision-Making in Criminal Proceedings: Foreign Experience and the Prospects for Using it in Russia

Author:

Vilkova Tatiana1,Maziuk Roman2,Khokhryakov Maxim1

Affiliation:

1. Kutafin Moscow State Law University

2. Baikal State University

Abstract

The processes of the convergence and divergence of law in the era of globalization as well as the trend for establishing similar court proceedings in different countries determine the necessity of studying legal concepts still unknown in the Russian legislation but widely applied in other countries, and expediency is one of them. The goal of this research is to analyze Russian and foreign legislation from both modern and historical perspectives, to analyze the legal regulation of expediency in criminal proceedings, to determine its contents, to differentiate between expediency as a principle and as grounds for the decision to refuse the initiation of criminal proceedings or to terminate them, which is made by a specially authorized official or a state body, to present well-grounded suggestions for the improvement of Russian legislation and the practice of law enforcement. It is determined that expediency is recognized as a principle of criminal proceedings in a number of European states. It is shown that the principle of expediency does not contradict justice and is based on such characteristics of criminal procedure activities as effectiveness, optimality, promptness, procedural economy. At the same time, legislations of the UK, Germany, France and Switzerland provide for the discretionary powers of the prosecutor and other officials to refuse to initiate criminal proceedings, to refuse to bring charges or support them due to inexpediency. The authors show the advantages and disadvantages of making decisions on such grounds: the disadvantages include wide discretionary powers of the officials which could lead to the abuse of power in the absence of necessary guarantees (corruption-generating factor); the advantages are procedural economy, wide opportunities for officials and state bodies involved in the criminal process to use discretionary powers depending on the circumstances of each specific case. They argue that the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation should provide an opportunity for specially authorized officials and state bodies to refuse to initiate a criminal case or pursue criminal prosecution on the grounds of inexpediency.

Publisher

Baikal State University

Subject

Law,Sociology and Political Science

Reference33 articles.

1. Zorkin V.D. Interaction of national and supranational justice: new challenges and perspectives. Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya = Journal of Constitutional Justice, 2012, no. 5, pp. 1–12. (In Russian).

2. Trefilov A.A. Criminal proceedings of foreign countries. Moscow, Voskhod-A Publ., 2016. Vol. 1. 1019 p.

3. Kleinfeld J. Three principles of democratic criminal justice. Northwestern University Law Review, 2017, no. 6, iss. 111, pp. 1455–1490.

4. Dukhovskoi M.V. Russian criminal process. M.V. Klyukin Publ., 1910. 448 p.

5. Chebyshev-Dmitriev A.P. Russian criminal proceedings under judicial statutes November 20, 1864. Saint Petersburg, V.P. Pechatkin Publ., 1875. 756 p.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3