Current legal organization of judicial evidence and 'independent, objective' judges

A.S. Aleksandrov ^a*, A.A. Yunusov ^b**, N.N. Rybushkin ^c***

^aNizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation,

Nizhniy Novgorod, 603081 Russia

^bTimiryasov Kazan Innovative University, Kazan, 420111 Russia

^сKazan Federal University, Kazan, 420008 Russia

E-mail: ^*anrc@rambler.ru, ^**axatuk@rambler.ru, ^***Nikolay.Rebushkin@kpfu.ru

Received December 20, 2019

Full text PDF

DOI: 10.26907/2541-7738.2020.2.186-200

For citation: Aleksandrov A.S., Yunusov A.A., Rybushkin N.N. Current legal organization of judicial evidence and “independent, objective” judges. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2020, vol. 162, no. 2, pp. 186–200. doi: 10.26907/2541-7738.2020.2.186-200. (In Russian)

Abstract

The paper proposes a solution to the fundamental problem of Russia’s legal and socio-economic development, which is related to establishing fair (objective and independent) trial. We believe that this problem can be successfully solved by changing the current criminal procedure and developing an adversarial organization of criminal proceedings. The main measures for the institutional judicial reform to achieve this goal were discussed. We consider it necessary to renounce the canons of the Soviet school of investigative criminal procedure and criminal procedural evidence. The main provisions of a new theory of criminal procedural (judicial) evidence, which is being developed in the Nizhny Novgorod school of proceduralists, were outlined. Among these provisions is the concept of judicial truth, the standards of proof of decisions taken in the course of criminal proceedings. Our own view on the process of formation of judicial evidence and facts, which should be taken as the basis for acts of law enforcement, was explained. The projects of judicial institutions responsible for bringing charges and the adversarial model of criminal procedure mechanism of bringing to criminal responsibility were built. In our opinion, the institution of cross-examination and direct interrogation must ensure the rule of judicial investigation over preliminary investigation. Otherwise, it is impossible to create an independent and objective criminal trial.

Keywords: criminal trial, proof, evidence, judicial power, justice, judges

References

1. Aleksandrov A.S. [et al.] Doktrinal’naya model’ ugolovno-protsessual’nogo dokazatel’stvennogo prava RF i Kommentarii k nei [A Doctrinal Model of Criminal Procedural Law of Evidence in the Russian Federation and Commentaries on It]. Moscow, Yurlitinform, 2015. 299 p. (In Russian)
2. Petrażycki L.I. Ocherki filosofii prava. Vypusk pervyi: Osnovy psikhologicheskoi teorii prava. Obzor i kritika sovremennykh vozzrenii na sushchestvo prava [Essays on the Philosophy of Law. First Issue: Fundamentals of the Psychological Theory of Law. Review and Criticism of Modern Views on the Essence of Law]. St. Petersburg, Tip. Yu.N. Erlikh, 1900. 138 p. (In Russian)
3. Aleksandrov A.S. The concept and essence of criminal action. Gosudarstvo i Pravo, 2006, no. 2, pp. 35–47. (In Russian)
4. Aleksandrov A.S., Vlasova S.V. Anti-dogmatics: A new understanding of the criminal process and law. Rossiiskii Zhurnal Pravovykh Issledovanii, 2019, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 53–61. (In Russian)
5. Aleksandrov A.S., Aleksandrova I.A. Criminal Code  + Criminal Procedure = Criminal law. Aktual’nye problemy vzaimosvyazi ugolovnogo prava i ugolovnogo protsessa: Sb. materialov Vseros. nauch.-praktich. konf. s mezhdunar. uchastiem (Ufa, 31 oktyabrya 2016 g.) [Current Problems of Criminal Law and Procedure Relation: Proc. All-Russ. Sci.-Pract. Conf. Int. Participation (Ufa, Oct. 31, 2016)]. Ufa, RITs BashGU, 2016, pp. 4–18. (In Russian)
6. Aleksandrov A.S., Aleksandrova I.A., Vlasova S.V. The theoretical concept of the state-legal organization of counteraction to crime in the 21st century. Gosudarstvo i Pravo, 2019, no. 9, pp. 75–86. doi: 10.31857/S013207690006732-7. (In Russian)
7. Terekhin V.V. Admissibility of evidence in criminal procedure: Methodological, legal, and ethical aspects. Doct. Law Diss. Nizhny Novgorod, 2016. 510 p. (In Russian)
8. Khmel’nitskaya T.V. The problems of building evidence during pre-trial proceedings for a criminal case. Cand. Law Diss. Nizhny Novgorod, 2016. 214 p. (In Russian)
9. Tauber L.Ya. Lawsuit, accusation, and principle of controversy Vestnik Grazhdanskogo Prava, 1917, no. 2, pp. 76–100. (In Russian)
10. Standarty spravedlivogo pravosudiya (mezhdunarodnye i natsional’nye praktiki [Principles of Fair Administration of Justice (International and National Practices)]. Morshchakova T.G. (Ed.). Moscow, Mysl’, 2012. 584 p. (In Russian)
11. Nikonov M.A. Using remand in custody as a preventive measure: Legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of Russia. Ugolovnyi Protsess, 2014, no. 4, pp. 50–61. (In Russian)
12. Aleksandrov A.S., Grishin S.P., Koneva S.I. Perekrestnyi dopros v sude (ob”yasnenie ego sushchnosti, printsipov i poryadka provedeniya, a takzhe prakticheskoe nastavlenie k upotrebleniyu) [Cross-Examination in Court: Its Essence, Principles, Rules, and Guidelines for Its Practical Use]. Moscow, Yurlitinform, 2014. 584 p. (In Russian)

The content is available under the license Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.