On the possiblities of the prosecutors use of digital technologies in the consideration of the criminal case received whit the indictment


如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅或者付费存取

详细

The article considers the possibilities of optimizing the activities of the prosecutor in the examination of the criminal case received with in the indictment. It is stated that at this stage of pre-trial proceedings solves a double task. As a participant in criminal proceedings on the part of the prosecution, he is obliged to contribute to the task of identifying and exposing the perpetrator of the crimes for which the criminal proceedings against him have been initiated. It also oversees the procedural activities of investigative bodies. These activities are primarily aimed at ensuring the principle of the appointment of criminal proceedings. Under it, protection of the rights and legitimate interests of person and organizations, victim of crimes should be carried out only if the individual is protected from unlawful and unjustified accusation, conviction and maintenance of her rights and freedoms. A thorough examination by prosecutor of the criminal case brought with the indictment, the prevention of his submission to the court due to the poor quality of the investigation is one of the forms of implementation of this principle. The complexity and complexity of this work require rationalization, including through the development, testing and implementation of appropriate software tools. The article gives the views of prosecutors on the possibilities of their application in this activity. According to the author, such a programme may consist of relatively localized but internally unified and generally oriented sets of thought operations and proceedings of the prosecutors. Despite the fact that complete digitalization (robotics) of prosecutors supervision in pre-trial proceedings is almost impossible, the proposed option of optimizing the work of the prosecutor on the site under consideration is an undeniable means of ridding him of some routine operations, allowing him to focus on the most important issues to be solved at this stage.

全文:

受限制的访问

作者简介

Vyacheslav Isaenko

Moscow State Univetrsity named O.E.Kutafin (MSAL)

Email: viach.isaencko2015@yandex.ru
Dr. Sci. (Law), Professor, Professor of Department of Judicial and Prosecutor-Investigation Activities Moscow, Russian Federation

参考

  1. Конституция Российской Федерации (принята всенародным голосованием 12 декабря 1993 г.)//Собрание законодательства Российской Федерации, 04.08.2014, № 31, ст. 43978.
  2. Федеральный закон от 17 января 1992 г. № 2202-1 «О прокуратуре Российской Федерации//Ведомости СНД РФ и ВС РФ, 20.08.1992, № 8, ст. 366.
  3. Стратегия развития информационного общества в Российской Федерации на 2017 - 2030 годы, утвержденная Указом Президента Российской Федерации от 09.05.2017 № 203// Собрание законодательства Российской Федерации, 15.05.2017, № 20, ст. 2901.
  4. Баев О.Я. Прокурор как субъект уголовного преследования: научно-практическое пособие. - М.: Юрлитинформ, 2006. С. 60-75.
  5. Белов С. Цифровизация надзорной деятельности прокурора в уголовном судопроизводстве//Законность. 2019. № 4.
  6. Исаенко В.Н. Прокурорский надзор за исполнением законов в оперативно-розыскной деятельности и в досудебном производстве. - 2-е изд., испр. и доп. - М.: Юрлитинформ, 2018.
  7. Настольная книга прокурора. В 2 ч. Ч. 2/ под общ.ред. О.С. Капинус и С.Г. Кехлерова. - 5-е изд., перераб. и доп. - М.: Юрайт, 2019.
  8. Щерба С.П., Ережепалиев Д.И. Прокурор в досудебном производстве по уголовным делам. - М.: Юрлитинформ. 2015.
  9. Юридическая концепция роботизации: монография/отв.ред. Ю.А. Тихомиров. - М.: Проспект, 2019.

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML


##common.cookie##