Standard regulation of counteraction to abuse of right in criminal trial

Various legislative designs of provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation whose purpose is the creation of effective standard fixation of counteraction to abuse of right in criminal trial are the subject of the present research. The following tasks are solved in the paper: 1) it is established that the current legislation and the developing practice allow to counteract effectively the system and non-system manifestations of abuse of right; 2) the legislative regulation of counteraction to abuse of right in criminal trial and civil law is compared; 3) various theoretical schemes of counteraction to abuse of right available in scientific literature are analysed. The main methods used in work are comparison, logical techniques of induction and deduction. Material on the basis of which conclusions of the research have been received are definitions and decisions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the considered criminal cases, and also the statistical data obtained from the official site of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Omsk Regional Court and the Volgograd Regional Court. Within the research such specific scientific methods as formal legal, allowing to compare the concept of abuse of right in criminal trial and civil law, and comparative legal, by means of which the projects of introduction of amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation concerning standard regulation of counteraction to abuse of right which are available in literature have been compared, are used. On the basis of the conducted research the following conclusions have been drawn. Rules about counteraction to abuse of right can not be considered as the principle of criminal trial as an institute which does not extend the action to all participants of criminal trial and works for the category of individuals can not be fundamental. In criminal legal proceedings the use of general formulations is inadmissible in relation to the studied phenomenon, only "individual" changes of the legislation and the corresponding correction of investigative and judicial practice are possible. In this regard the duty to work honestly and reasonably, without allowing abuse of right has to be fixed in the norms regulating the rights and duties of such participants of the trial as the suspect, the defendant and the defender.

Keywords

Authors

References