Recourse action against investigative authorities is a legal way of «fall guys:» identifying who made a mistake in the criminal procedural system

Cover Page
Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract


The author indicates how and in which ways tendencies of recourse recovery from guilty persons of investigative authorities can be realized. The article reviews practical experience of recourse actions disposition over the last years in the Russian Federation. From the author’s point of view, this practical experience is confusing, conflicting, and potentially hazardous.

In 2018, the Law Commission of the Government of the Russian Federation endorsed a bill aimed at improving recourse actions against investigative authorities. The legal fundamentals of the bill are stated in regulations of Chapter 18 the RF CPC and again in Articles 1069, 1070, 1080, sub-paragraphs 3 and 3.1 of the Article 1081 of the CCRF. The main idea of the bill is to improve the subjects and practice of recourse recovery from guilty parties of investigative authorities and other law enforcement agencies of those funds that were disbursed to rehabilitees from the Treasury of the Russian Federation account in accordance with Chapter 18 of the RF CPC [1]. The Russian Federation State Duma presented a bill in 2019 that specified the minimum amount of state monetary compensation for unwarranted prosecution of such persons who (in future) would be liable to rehabilitation. There are some innovations of the given bill. The minimum compensation per rehabilitee is 1000 RUB for each day of pretrial investigation and judicial inquiry; 5000 RUB per day for illegal use of such restrictive measures as house imprisonment, restraining order, and written undertaking not to leave the place; and 15 000 RUB per day of illegal stay in pretrial detention facility [2].

If these new measures are accepted, the amounts of recourse against investigative authorities will be cardinally increased. The keys of the above-noted lie in growing statements. The main point of these statements is that the federal budget loses huge sums annually and irrevocably through the realization of institute rehabilitation.


Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Kovtun N. Kovtun

Nizhniy Novgorod academy of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia

Author for correspondence.
Email: kovtunnnov@mail.ru

Russian Federation, Nizhniy Novgorod

Doctor of Law, Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure of the Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation

References

  1. Trifonova E. Regression by almost a billion rubles. Judges and investigators can be forced to pay for mistakes out of their own pockets. Screen title. URL: http://nvo.ng.ru/politics/2018-02-08/3_7168_regress.html (Accessed: 02.06.2020) (In Russ.).
  2. Alshevskaya A. They propose to pay more for illegal criminal prosecution (Draft Law No. 729341-7 "On Amendments to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in terms of establishing the minimum amount of compensation for moral damage for illegal criminal prosecution"). Screen title. URL: https://pravo.ru/news/212289/ (Accessed 04.06.2020). (In Russ.).
  3. Potetinov V.A. Filing a recourse action against an investigator: reasons, practice and risks. Criminal process. 2019;(10):80-85. (In Russ.).
  4. Zyablina M.V., Velikaya E.V. Submission of recourse claims by prosecutors in connection with the adoption by the courts of decisions on compensation to rehabilitated persons for harm caused by illegal (unjustified) criminal prosecution. Legality. 2016;(4):13-17. (In Russ.).
  5. Larkina E.V. A recourse action against an investigator as a consequence of a person's rehabilitation in criminal proceedings. Criminalist. 2018;(3):24-30. (In Russ.).
  6. Brusnitsyn L.V. Are prosecutors and representatives of the Ministry of Finance needed in cases of compensation for harm in connection with illegal criminal prosecution? Criminal process. 2009;(11):18-21. (In Russ.).
  7. Vinitskiy L.V., Mullakhmetova N.Ye. On regressive responsibility of officials guilty of illegal criminal prosecution. Bulletin of SUSU. Series "Right". 2015;15(2):49-54. (In Russ.).
  8. Askerov B.M. Some problems of criminal investigation. Gaps in Russian legislation. 2011;(6):261-265. (In Russ.).
  9. Lizunov A.S. Pre-investigation check as part of pre-trial proceedings: dis. ... Cand. jurid. Sciences (12.00.09). N. Novgorod, 2017. 226 p. (In Russ.).

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 156

PDF (Russian) - 2

Cited-By


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

PlumX

Dimensions

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Kovtun K.N.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies