Suchergebnisse

The article is dedicated to the explanation of such legislative defects as gaps in the criminal procedural legislation during court decisions appeal. Within the framework of the study the attention focuses on the fact that regulatory rulemaking of the court decisions appeal in criminal proceeding contains multiple gaps that affect negatively at its practical implementation. Detailed analysis of the gaps in the criminal procedure legislation has been carried out. By reference to specific aspects of the judicial review implementation, the gaps classification according to their subject is proposed. More specifically the following gaps in the rulemaking of the court decisions appeal in criminal proceedings are identified: 1) concerning the object of appeal; 2) concerning the appealer; 3) concerning the subject of appeal; 4) concerning the appeal procedure, etc. It is pointed out that number of legal regulation gaps regarding the identification of the object of appeal is quite significant. Such gaps arise in response to the determining a list of court decisions by the legislator that are subject to appeal consequently making impossible reviewing those court decisions that are not directly enlisted. Such matter is illustrated by the example of the establishment of restrictions on the ability to appeal the investigating magistrate decisions. Considering the gaps concerning the appealer it is pointed out that in some cases the legislation does not provide the right of relevant parties for court decisions appeal or does not provide them with sufficient legal opportunities which limits a person's constitutional privilege for court decision appeal review and his/her access to judicial proceedings. The analysis of gaps concerning the subject of appeal was also carried out. It is concluded with reason that such gaps arise due to the disadvantageous legislative determining of the issues which are allowed to appeal procedure. In the course of the research attention is drawn to the fact that the criminal procedural legislature ...

The article explores the issues of the victim's involvement in the process of obtaining temporary access to things and documents. The current legislative provisions were analyzed, according to it only the parties to criminal proceedings have the right to appeal to the investigating judge during the pretrial investigation or the court during the court proceedings requesting temporary access to things and documents. It is established that when a victim is not a part of the criminal proceedings, he is not empowered to apply to the investigating judge with a request for temporary access to things and documents. However, the practice of applying the law evidences about application another one approach to the solution of this issue, in particular, the existing court decisions on granting the investigative judge permission to the victim to temporary access to things and documents. This practice has led the Supreme Court to find that there is a lack of clarity, uncertainty about the legal rules regarding the victim's status and his rights in criminal proceedings, which constitutes an exclusive legal problem. In order to resolve this issue and to ensure the development of the law and the formation of a single law enforcement practice, the panel of judges concluded that it was necessary to refer the criminal proceedings to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. In order to resolve this problem and to ensure the development of law and the formation of a uniform law enforcement practice, the panel of judges concluded that it was necessary to refer criminal proceedings to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court and to ask questions for clarification of the legislative provisions. On the basis of the generalized case law, it was concluded that there is no unity in approaches to granting the victim permission for temporary access to things and documents. It is concluded that the issues raised in the article are theoretical and practical issues of granting the victim permission for temporary access to things and documents which ...

The article is dedicated to the explanation of such legislative defects as gaps in the criminal procedural legislation during court decisions appeal. Within the framework of the study the attention focuses on the fact that regulatory rulemaking of the court decisions appeal in criminal proceeding contains multiple gaps that affect negatively at its practical implementation. Detailed analysis of the gaps in the criminal procedure legislation has been carried out. By reference to specific aspects of the judicial review implementation, the gaps classification according to their subject is proposed. More specifically the following gaps in the rulemaking of the court decisions appeal in criminal proceedings are identified: 1) concerning the object of appeal; 2) concerning the appealer; 3) concerning the subject of appeal; 4) concerning the appeal procedure, etc. It is pointed out that number of legal regulation gaps regarding the identification of the object of appeal is quite significant. Such gaps arise in response to the determining a list of court decisions by the legislator that are subject to appeal consequently making impossible reviewing those court decisions that are not directly enlisted. Such matter is illustrated by the example of the establishment of restrictions on the ability to appeal the investigating magistrate decisions. Considering the gaps concerning the appealer it is pointed out that in some cases the legislation does not provide the right of relevant parties for court decisions appeal or does not provide them with sufficient legal opportunities which limits a person's constitutional privilege for court decision appeal review and his/her access to judicial proceedings. The analysis of gaps concerning the subject of appeal was also carried out. It is concluded with reason that such gaps arise due to the disadvantageous legislative determining of the issues which are allowed to appeal procedure. In the course of the research attention is drawn to the fact that the criminal procedural legislature furthermore contains other gaps in the rulemaking of court decisions appeal. In particular they concern the appeal procedure itself, implementation of the rights of its participants and some other issues. By way of illustration of the given type of gap it is indicated that the opportunity of implementation of the right to appeal for those persons who are directly granted with it by the law may be complicated due to the shortage of the actual opportunity to appeal against the judgment, in light of the high requirements for its content and format, advanced by the domestic lawmaking body. In the article motions considering eliminating and overcoming the enlisted legislative defects are formulated. ; Статья посвящена исследованию и выявлению пробелов в уголовно-процессуальном законодательстве при обжаловании судебных решений. Обращается внимание на то, что нормативное регулирование обжалования судебных решений в уголовном судопроизводстве содержит многочисленные пробелы, негативно влияющие на его практическое исполнение. С учетом некоторых аспектов осуществления пересмотра судебных решений предлагается классифицировать пробелы по их предметным признакам. Формулируются предложения по устранению выявленых дефектов правового регулирования. ; Стаття присвячена дослідженню та виявленню прогалин кримінального процесуального законодавства щодо апеляційного оскарження рішень суду. Акцентується увага на тому, що нормативна регламентація питань апеляційного оскарження судових рішень у кримінальному провадженні містить численні прогалини, які негативно впливають на його практичну реалізацію. З урахуванням тих чи інших аспектів реалізації перегляду судових рішень пропонується класифікація прогалин за їх предметною ознакою. Розроблено пропозиції щодо усунення та подолання виокремлених дефектів нормативного регулювання.