Author

Nikanorov S.A.

Title of article

Procedural status of prosecutor during the conduction of short inquiry

Section

The problems of legal science and law enforcement practice: young researchers’ view

Issue, year

4 (30) 2014

Abstract

The issues of conducting short inquiry from the position of prosecutor’s procedural status are considered. Low rate of applying short inquiry is caused by ignorance about this procedural form among the participants in criminal procedure. The initiators of conducting short inquiry were not suspects (accused), but their lawyers who followed by their own ambitions, not by the interests of defendants. The insufficiency of total time of short inquiry is noted. The author proposes to minimize prosecutors’ paperwork, notably to concentrate their attention on collecting crime data by conducting secret investigation operations, receiving explanations and other documentation. Obtained data should be processed according to police regulations. Confession of guilt, recognition of damage and consent with legal assessment of criminal act allow to collect only the evidence, indicating crime event and complicacy of a person (expertise should be established on court’s initiative). The favourable conditions of adequacy of collected evidence for establishing crime event, character and amount of damage, as well as guilt of committing crime are confirmed. The right of investigators not to examine evidences if they were not contradicted by suspect, victim or his/her representative (predetermined strength of evidence) is criticized. There is no short effective procedure of trying criminal cases with rational division of powers among the authorities, conducting criminal proceeding. The author proves the necessity of reasonable approach to prosecutor’s supervision of conducting short inquiry. Main tendency of further improvement of short inquiry procedure is redivision of powers among agencies in charge of preliminary investigation and prosecutor’s office.

Keywords

short inquiry form, investigator, time of inquiry, suspects, status of prosecutor.

References

1. Ovodov A.A. Interv’yu s direktorom Instituta povysheniya kvalifikatsii Sledstvennogo komiteta Rossiyskoy Federatsii Anatoliem Mikhaylovichem Bagmetom [Interview with the Director of Training Institute of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation Anatoly Bagmet]. Yurist – Lawyer, 2013, no. 23, pp. 3-13.

2. Zaytseva E.A. Novyy zakon o sokrashchennom doznanii i reglamentatsiya ispol’zovaniya spetsial’nykh poznaniy v dosudebnom proizvodstve po ugolovnym delam, ili Khoteli kak luchshe, a poluchilos’ kak vsegda... [The new law reducing the use of inquiry and regulation of special knowledge in pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases, or wanted the best, but it turned out as always...]. Rossiyskiy sud’ya – Russian judge, 2013, no. 4, pp. 36-39.

3. Kryukov V.F. Ugolovnoe presledovanie v dosudebnom proizvodstve: ugolovno-protsessual’nye i nadzornye aspekty deyatel’nosti prokurora [Criminal prosecution in pretrial proceedings, criminal procedure and supervisory aspects of the prosecutor]. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2010. 480 p.

4. Makhov V.N., Peshkov M.A. Yuristy SShA o modelyakh ugolovnogo protsessa [Lawyers USA about the models of the criminal process]. Yurist – Lawyer, 1999, no. 2, pp. 35-48.

5. Artamonov A.N. Nadzor za proizvodstvom doznaniya v sokrashchennoy forme [Supervision of inquiry in abbreviated form]. Zakonnost’ – Legality, 2013, no. 7, pp. 36-39.

6. Golovko L.V. Rossiyskiy sudebnyy protsess arkhaichen [Russian trial archaic]. Pravo.Ru: informatsionnyy portal (19 iyunya 2012 g.) [Pravo.Ru: information portal (June 19, 2012)]. Available at: http://pravo.ru/review/face/view/73251 (Accessed 1 June 2014).

7. Dolya E.A. Osobennosti dokazyvaniya pri proizvodstve doznaniya v sokrashchennoy forme [Features of proof during the initial inquiry in an abbreviated form]. Rossiyskiy sud’ya – Russian judge, 2013, no. 6, pp. 43-46.