Features for ensuring the rights and freedoms of the suspect (accused) in the CIS states according to the European standards

Author/s Talgat T. Dyussebayev, Kuanysh T. Terlikbayev, Talgat T. Balashov, Marat I. Zhumagulov, Alima O. Omirali
Publishing Year 2020 Issue 2020/1 Language English
Pages 19 P. 247-265 File size 113 KB
DOI 10.3280/RISS2020-001015
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The purpose of the article is to ensure the rights and freedoms of the suspect in the field of modern transformations of the criminal procedure legislation. In this article, the authors attempted to analyze the problems arising in practice of ensuring the rights and freedoms of the suspect (accused) in the light of modern changes in the criminal procedural law in the CIS countries, comparing them with the changes that have taken place and are currently being improved in the legislation of the European Union. The methodological and empirical basis for writing this article was composed of the general scientific dialectic method of cognition and the pri-vate scientific methods, which include historical-legal, systemic-functional, formal-logical, comparative-legal, etc. The authors studied only the latest and most relevant standards that meet the latest trends in criminal procedure legislation in the field of granting and protecting the rights and freedoms of a suspect (accused).

Keywords: Reform, European Union standards, criminal procedural norms, communitarian norms.

  1. Anichin A. (2010). The archaic nature of the investigative procedural form. Russian Newspaper. -- Available from: http://www.ntv.ru/novosti/1577741.
  2. Arabuli D.T. (2011). Personal protection is a priority of criminal proceedings. Russian Justice, 12: 74-82.
  3. Biryukov M.M. (2005). The first constituent treaty of the European Union. “Constitution for Europe” and recent changes in the composition and status of the European Parliament. Journal of Russian Law, 5: 10-17.
  4. Biryukov P.N. (2011). International law. Moscow: Yurayt.
  5. Bocharov T. (2016). Diagnostics of the judicial system in the field of criminal proceedings and proposals for its reform. Nauka, St. Petersburg.
  6. Case C-8/81 Ursula Becker v Finanzamt Munster-Innenstadt; Case C-91/92, Paola Faccini Dori v RecrebSrl.
  7. Damirchiev E.I. (2010). Cooperation of the Member States of the European Union in the field of criminal proceedings. -- Available from: http://law.edu.ru/book/book.asp?bookID=1458465.
  8. Demidov I.F. (2003). Human rights as a factor determining the civilized nature of the criminal process. Publishing House “Legal Center Press”, St. Petesburg.
  9. Enikeev Z. (2005). The constitutional principle of legality and the problems of its implementation in the criminal process. Chelyabinsk State University, Chelyabinsk.
  10. Entin L.M., Entin M.L., Trykanova S.A., Orina I.V. (2011). Actual problems of European law textbook. Flint, Moscow.
  11. Ermishina N.S. (2012). European standards in the field of human rights and their role in ensuring the rights of individuals in the Russian criminal process. Legal Sciences, Saratov.
  12. Foynitsky A. (1912). Course of criminal proceedings. Alpha, St. Petersburg.
  13. Golovko L.V. (2009). Analytical note “Institute of judicial control over the pre-trial detention of continental criminal procedure”, Center for Legal Policy Research, Almaty.
  14. Guskova A.P. (1996). The identity of the accused in criminal proceedings (problems of theory and practice). Center of the OGAU, Orenburg.
  15. Guskova A.P. (2001). Problems of legal regulation of international cooperation on criminal procedure law. OSU, Orenburg.
  16. Guskova A.P. (2003a). Issues of protecting individual rights in international criminal procedure law. Moscow Academy of Economics and Law, Moscow.
  17. Guskova A.P. (2003b). To the question of the concepts of “protection” and “protection” used in the Russian criminal proceedings. Center of the OGAU, Orenburg.
  18. Herlin-Karnell E. (2018). The Lisbon treaty and the area of criminal law and justice. European Policy Analysis, 3: 21-26.
  19. Hodgson J.S. (2011). Safeguarding suspects’ rights in europe a comparative perspective. New Criminal Law Review: an International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 14(4): 611-665.
  20. Husabo E.J. and Strandbakken A. (2017). Harmonization of criminal law in Europe. Intersentia, Antwerpen.
  21. Jimeno-Bulnes M. (2010). Towards common standards on rights of suspected and accused persons in criminal proceedings in the EU. University of Burgos, Burgos. -- Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1926258.
  22. Karmaza O.O., Stefanyshyn N.M., Skhab-Buchynska T.Y., Koroied S.O. (2018). Institute of dispute resolution by the participation of a judge in the court of Ukraine: Joint and different characteristics with the institute of mediation in Ukraine. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 9(5): 1653-1659.
  23. Kartashkin V.A. (2015). Universal democracy of human rights in the modern world (on the 40th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). SEMP, Moscow.
  24. Kremens K. (2019). The protection of the accused in international criminal law according to the human rights law standard. Wroclaw Review of Law, Administration & Economics, 1(2). -- Available from: https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/wrlae.2011.1.issue-2/wrlae-2013-0026/wrlae-2013-0026.pdf.
  25. Larin A.M. (2016). Presumption of innocence. Moscow: Publishing House “Yurayt”.
  26. Loskutov I.Yu. (2012). Criminal law reforms and the criminal law policy development process in Kazakhstan: needs, opportunities and current challenges. -- Available from: https://www.zakon.kz/4523684-ugolovno-pravovye-reformy-i-process.html.
  27. Macovei M. and Razumov S.A. (2016). European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Article 5. Rossiyskaya Akademiya Pravosudiya, Moscow.
  28. Markovicheva E.V. (2009). International standards of reasonableness of the terms of criminal proceedings. Criminal Proceedings, 4: 12-18.
  29. Mullerson R.A. (1991). Human rights and freedoms in international law. Yuridicheskaya Literatura, Moscow.
  30. Novikova O.N. (2018). “Democracy deficit” in the EU: the main directions of a critical analysis of the problem: (review). Actual Problems of Europe, 4: 45-49.
  31. Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (2011). Analytical report. Judicial authorization of arrest in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Warsaw: WULSP.
  32. Peers S. (2008). EU criminal law and the Treaty of Lisbon. European Law Review, 33(4): 36-41.
  33. Pisoiu D. (2005). Reactive integration: police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters: cooperation or communitisation?. GRIN Verlag, Nordestedt.
  34. Report of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation for 2012 (2013). Russian Newspaper, 5. -- Available from: https://rg.ru/gazeta/2013/03/29.html.
  35. Shadrin V.S. (2000). Ensuring the rights of individuals in the investigation of crimes. Yurlitinform, Moscow.
  36. Shamson R.T. (2003). Human rights and the internal competence of the state. Moscow Journal of International Law, 2: 1-16.
  37. Stoyko N.G. (2009). The criminal process of the Western states and Russia: a comparative theoretical and legal study of the Anglo-American and Romano-German legal systems. Sibirsk Federal University, Sibirsk.
  38. Tiunov O.I. (2003). The protection of human rights in the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the context of the internationalization of Russian law and the role of international standards in this process. International Public and Private Law, 2(11): 98-103.
  39. Trunov I.L., Trunova L.K. (2002). Personal rights and conditions for their maintenance in the criminal process. Publishing Group “Lawyer”, Moscow.
  40. Vâlcu E. (2016). Procedural rights of the suspects and of the accused during the criminal procedures according to the new communitarian regulations. Jurnalul de Drept si Stiinte Administrative, 6: 77-93.
  41. Volkova V. (2015). Accusation and acquittal in post-Soviet criminal justice. Norma, Moscow.
  42. Weyembergh A. (2011). La cooperation judiciairepenale au sein de l’Unioneuropeenne. Bruylant, Bruxelles.
  43. Yunoshev S.V. (2012). Implementation of the provisions of Art. 6.1 Code of Criminal Procedure in the light of the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights. Lawyer, Moscow.

Talgat T. Dyussebayev, Kuanysh T. Terlikbayev, Talgat T. Balashov, Marat I. Zhumagulov, Alima O. Omirali, Features for ensuring the rights and freedoms of the suspect (accused) in the CIS states according to the European standards in "RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA'" 1/2020, pp 247-265, DOI: 10.3280/RISS2020-001015