Manova N.S., Solovieva N.A. A Special Procedure for the Trial in the Context of Modern Civilizational Transformations of Procedural and Legal Approaches
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/lc.jvolsu.2023.1.2
Nina S. Manova, Doctor of Sciences (Jurisprudence), Professor, Head of the Department of Criminal Procedure, Saratov State Law Academy, Volskaya St, 1, 410056 Saratov, Russian Federation, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6605-1597
Natalya A. Solovieva, Candidate of Sciences (Jurisprudence), Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Procedural Law and Criminalistics, Volgograd State University, Prosp. Universitetsky, 100, 400062 Volgograd, Russian Federation, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9698-0845
Introduction. In accordance with the current Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the hearing and resolution of criminal cases are allowed not only according to the traditional procedure clearly outlined by the criminal procedure legislation but also in a simplified form that is enshrined in law as a special procedure for the trial (Chapters 40 and 40.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). Special procedures for the trial have been used in the world for settling criminal law conflicts, and they fit perfectly into the modern Russian criminal process based on a balance of interests and procedural economy. However, it is also obvious that they are deprived of the essential sign of justice – the hearing of the case on the merits – regulate sentencing without trial, and are accompanied by some problems not only of a procedural but also of a moral nature. In this regard, the purpose of the paper is to identify how a special procedure for the trial is able to ensure lawful and reasonable sentencing, and the defendant’s right to be acquitted if the prosecution does not provide a sufficient amount of reliable evidence of his guilt. Methods. The methodological framework for the research is made up of the general scientific methods (dialectical, systemic, structural-functional, logical, etc.) and the specific scientific methods (formal-legal, comparative-legal, etc.). Results. The analysis showed that the legislative provision states that a judge must carefully study the materials of a criminal case when preparing for the trial and must interrogate the defendant to establish his attitude to the charge and his true intentions when filing a petition for the hearing of the case. This is necessary to avoid unlawful sentencing. Conclusions. The main difference between the general and special procedures for the trial is that, if in the first one, reasonable sentencing and the defendant’s right to be acquitted are ensured by the research and evaluation during the trial of the evidence presented by the parties, then in the second one, there is only the possibility of switching to the general procedure for considering a criminal case. The court's careful preliminary study of the evidence presented by the investigation bodies and identification of their possible inconsistencies when appointing the case for the trial helps to prevent cases of unlawful conviction due to the refusal of a special procedure for considering the case.
Key words: special procedure for the trial, the accused, ensuring the rights of the defendants, validity of the verdict, criminal case.
Citation. Manova N.S., Solovieva N.A. A Special Procedure for the Trial in the Context of Modern Civilizational Transformations of Procedural and Legal Approaches. Legal Concept = Pravovaya paradigma, 2023, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 13-20. (in Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/lc.jvolsu.2023.1.2
 1_Manova_Solovieva.pmd.pdfURL: https://j.jvolsu.com/index.php/en/component/attachments/download/2814 | 144 Downloads |