In this paper were analyzed issues of the humanization of criminal justice as an important criterion to assess the strengthening of guarantees of rights and freedoms. It analyzes the concept such as criminal justice, criminal procedure relationships and humanization of the criminal proceedings. In addition, the article highlights the important aspects of the humanization of the criminal proceedings.
В современных условиях, деятельность правоохранительных органов, ведущих борьбу с преступностью должна быть не просто качественной, а максимально эффективной. Такая эффективность невозможна без использования новейших достижений науки и техники. При этом, нельзя не отметить, что внедрение в уголовный процесс результатов научно технического прогресса поднимает целый пласт проблем, затрагивает различные аспекты: организационный, криминалистический, правовой и нравственнопсихологический33 34 35. Охватить весь комплекс проблем, связанных с цифровизацией уголовного судопроизводства в рамках одной статьи, конечно, не представляется возможным. В этой связи можно определить цель данной работы, как выявление тех сфер уголовного процесса, затрагиваемых цифровизацией, которые существенным образом могут повлиять на фундаментальные основы судопроизводства.
Становление и развитие уголовного процесса непосредственно связаны с преобразованиями социальных отношений конкретного исторического периода. Если XVIII - XIX века для ведущих государств мира знаменуемы промышленной революцией, и как следствие развитием правового регулирования общественных отношений, то сегодня смело можно утверждать о цифровой трансформации разных сфер общественный отношений, в том числе и уголовно-процессуальных. Результаты научно-технических достижений позволили говорить об электронной информации и электронных носителях информации. Идея цифровой трансформации уголовного судопроизводства полностью коррелирует с генеральной линией повышения транспарентности деятельности государственных органов, обозначенной в Указе Президента РФ «О Стратегии развития информационного общества в Российской Федерации на 2017 - 2030 годы»1, а также в «Едином плане по достижению национальных целей развития Российской Федерации на период до 2024 года и на плановый период до 2030 года»
The purpose of the study is to analyze the grounds for terminating a criminal case due to the non-appearance of a private prosecutor without good reason at a court session in criminal cases of private prosecution (both provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and arising from the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated April 13, 2021). The mechanism proposed by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation for exercising the right of the defendant to effective judicial protection did not remove the problem of applying Part 3 of Art. 249 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, and the legislator, who did not accept the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, returned to the basis for terminating the criminal. cases of private prosecution when the private prosecutor fails to appear without good reason at the court session, provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR.
In this article author had analyzed by the historical-legal aspects the organization and evolution of the criminal proceeding in the Ancient Greece states, the types of criminal proceedings and had comparative analyzed of their elements, the role and meaning on the intensification of the criminal proceeding.
There arc several principles ranging from legality, administration of justice only by court, independence of judges and their accountability to law only, mandatory initiation of criminal case, administration of justice on basis of equality before the law and court, respect for honor and dignity of individual, protection of human rights and freedoms, language of criminal proceedings, securing right of suspect, accused ordefendant to defense, right to bring complaint against procedural actions and adversarial principle of parties in the Code of Criminal Procedure of Uzbekistan.]
Принцип защиты прав и свобод, законных интересов граждан вытекает из ст. 2 и 60 Конституции Республики Беларусь, в которых установлено, что человек, его права, свободы и гарантии их реализации являются высшей ценностью и целью общества и государства и каждому гарантируется защита его прав и свобод компетентным, независимым и беспристрастным судом в определенные законом сроки
This article analyzes some of the problems associated with ensuring the security of participants in the criminal process, victims and witnesses. In addition, opinions and arguments were voiced on the results of the study of the current circumstances to ensure the safety of persons promoting justice.
387 / 5 000
Результаты перевода Перевод A distinctive feature of the functioning of modern society is the active use of information technology. Their introduction into almost all spheres of human activity has significantly expanded the conditions for an increase in the number of crimes committed using computer technology. The object of these crimes are public relations in various fields.Думается, что не «откроем Америки», если будем исходить из следующего утверждения:
Процессуальная дееспособность субъекта преступления напрямую зависит от момента присвоения ему соответствующего процессуального статуса при производстве по уголовному делу.
В статье исследуются модели организации и функционирования административного судопроизводства в Германии и Республике Узбекистан. Автором проводится сравнение узбекской модели административного судопроизводства с германской моделью, указываются на достоинства и недостатки.
The article analyzes tasks of simplified proceedings. The forms of simplified proceedings are considered as "summary proceedings" (England), "plea bargaining" (USA), "conditional refusal to initiate criminal prosecution", "criminal order" (France), "expedited proceedings"(Germany). The ways of implementation in domestic legislation have been developed and proposed based on the results of studying models of simplified legal proceedings.
SUMMARY
One of serious problems for each state is to ensure the promptness of criminal proceedings regardless of legal system in which it operates. Attention has recently been drawn to the need of introduction of simplified procedure among the ways to increase efficiency.
Discussion at the XII UN Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (El Salvador, Brazil, April 12-19, 2010) about the concept of simplified (accelerated) criminal justice showed that improving the fight against crime in modern conditions requires taking into account a wide range of factors. Issues negatively affecting its condition included ineffective and protracted investigations, limited use of pretrial detention clauses, ineffective case management, limited resources from prosecutors and judiciary and their insufficient use.
According to the UN, summary proceedings are simplified procedure that expedites court proceedings in order to make criminal justice system more efficient and minimize costs. In general, summary judgment is used in lower courts, usually for less serious criminal offenses, and is an expedited procedure in which certain formal procedures are not required or simplified.
In this article it is studied opportunities of perfection of the current criminally-procedural legislation from humanisation point of view of criminal legal proceedings. Author proved the necessity of addition to the Criminal-procedural code of Republic of Uzbekistan a new 27 1 article devoted to the humanity as a principle of criminal legal proceedings. It is suggested to define legal status of participants of process such as persons, providing supervision upon the suspected (accused) minors, personal guarantors, depositor and supernumeraries. Also it is extended practical recommendations about formation of humane sights at persons executing criminal legal proceedings.
With this article, the author continues the cycle of his scientific publications dedicated to the study of the structure of criminal procedural evidence. Based on the arguments presented, the author comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to partially revise his previous position, which implies the consideration of the categories of “collecting evidence” and “forming evidence” as two autonomous ways of carrying out the first stage of proof.
Instead, the author proposes to attach a somewhat conditional meaning to the category of “collection of evidence”, understanding by it any forms of behavior of participants in criminal proceedings aimed at obtaining and subsequent proceduralization of useful information.
SUMMARY
In this article, the author continues the series of scientific publications devoted to the study of the problems of collecting evidence as a cumulative stage of the work of the preliminary investigation bodies and the court with evidentiary materials in a criminal case. Moreover, these issues are considered in the context of a comparative analysis of the criminal procedure legislation of two sovereign states that emerged in the post Soviet space – Russia and Uzbekistan. In the first half of the article, the author introduces potential readers to his previous scientific positions on the essence of collecting evidence in criminal proceedings. And in the second part of the article, we consider the reasons that prompted a partial revision and rethinking of their previous positions. Based on these arguments, the author suggests that in the future the category "evidence collection" should be given a somewhat conditional meaning and that it should be understood as any form of behavior of participants in criminal proceedings aimed at obtaining and subsequent processing of useful information. The author believes that collection of evidence may be carried out through the implementation of two autonomous procedural mechanisms: a) formation of evidence, involving the creation (as the birth) of new educational resources through the procedural forms, i.e. through production in accordance with the CPC proceedings, consists in the perception of (study) the inquirer, investigator, court, as well as expert useful information and its transformation, transformation to the appropriate readings, expert opinions and results (protocols) of non-verbal investigative and judicial actions (and for the Uzbek criminal process-also audio, video and film recording materials that are Autonomous means of proof); b) attaching evidence to the materials of a criminal case that involves obtaining by presenting, requesting or withdrawing various items and documents, as well as their subsequent recognition as material evidence, other documents, expert opinions, results of operational search activities and administrative activities on the basis of a special state authority act of the body of inquiry, preliminary investigation or court, which gives them legal force and determines whether they can be used to justify law enforcement decisions.
Проблемы безопасности и защиты прав, свобод и законных интересов лиц, содействующих уголовному правосудию нашли свое законодательное отражение в международных нормативных правовых актах, таких как: Всеобщая декларация прав человека (принята Генеральной Ассамблеи ООН 10 декабря 1948 года) [1]; Международный пакт о гражданских и политических правах (принят Генеральной Ассамблеи ООН 16 декабря 1966 года) [2]; Каракасская декларация (принята Шестым конгрессом ООН по предупреждению преступности и обращению с правонарушителями 15 декабря 1980 года) [3] и ряде других международных стандартов в области защиты прав человека