Immediacy in Russian criminal procedure under the 1864 Statute of Criminal Proceedings: Limits of restriction and implementation guarantees

Shortly after the adoption of the 1864 Statute of Criminal Proceedings, it became evident that implementing immediacy in its pure form was impossible, as it intersected with other values of criminal procedure. Restrictions on immediacy were deemed permissible only when there was a substantial threat to another procedural value, which the court reasonably chose to prioritize in a specific case. Crucially, the court had to verify that protecting this competing interest was unachievable without limiting immediacy. Prerevolutionary legislation established both judicial and pretrial implementation guarantees for immediacy when restricted. These guarantees were linked to bringing the court closer to the facts under investigation and providing parties with the opportunity to challenge evidence. The understanding of immediacy varied depending on the type of evidence examined: for witness testimony and physical evidence, it was implemented in its pure form; for expert opinions, it involved significant conventionality; while for investigative act protocols, only formal immediacy was applied. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References