首页> 外文期刊>Pravoprimenenie >К вопросу о допустимости гражданско-правового освобождения имущества от ареста, наложенного при производстве по уголовному делу: отечественный и зарубежный опыт
【24h】

К вопросу о допустимости гражданско-правового освобождения имущества от ареста, наложенного при производстве по уголовному делу: отечественный и зарубежный опыт

机译:关于刑事诉讼中扣押的民事法律释放财产的可采性问题:国内外经验

获取原文
           

摘要

The subject of paper deals with the legal nature of measures of criminal procedural compulsion in the form of seizure of property. Methodological basis of the article is based on general scientific dialectical methods of cognition of objective reality of the legal processes and phenomena that allowed us to conduct an objective assessment of the state of legislation and law enforcement practice in the procedural aspects of the cancellation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings of Russia. The results and scope of it’s application. It is submitted that the cancellation of the seizure of the property (or the individual limit) is allowed only on the grounds and in the manner prescribed by the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. However, the study found serious contradictions in the application of the relevant law. In particular, cases in which the question of exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory),imposed in the criminal case was resolved in a civil procedure that, in the opinion of theauthor of the publication, is extremely unacceptable. On the stated issues topics analyzes opinions of scientists who say that the dispute about the release of impounded property may be allowed in civil proceedings, including pending resolution of the criminal case on the merits. The author strongly disagrees with this position and supports those experts who argue that the filing of a claim for exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory) the reviewed judicial act of imposing of arrest without recognition per se invalid. In this regard, the author cites the legal position of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, from which clearly follows that of the right of everyone to judicial protection does not imply the possibility of choice of the citizen at its discretion, techniques and procedures of judicial protection, since the features of such judicial protection is defined in specific Federal laws. The author analyzes and appreciates Kazakhstan's experience of legal regulation of the permissibility of filing a civil claim for exemption of property from seizure imposed in criminal proceedings. The author notes that the new civil procedural legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which came into force from 01 January 2016, clearly captures that consideration in the civil proceedings are not subject to claims for exemption of property from seizure by the criminal prosecution body. Conclusions. Necessity of amendment to article 422 of the Civil Procedure Code of Russia: this article should not apply to cases of application of measures of criminal procedural compulsion in the form of seizure of property. Among other things, the author proposed additions to part 9 of article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.
机译:本文的主题涉及扣押财产形式的刑事诉讼强制措施的法律性质。本文的方法论基础基于对法律程序和现象的客观现实的认识的一般科学辩证法,使我们能够在取消扣押的程序方面对立法和执法实践的状态进行客观评估。在俄罗斯的刑事诉讼中。结果和应用范围。有人指出,仅可根据俄罗斯联邦刑事诉讼法规定的理由和方式取消扣押财产(或个人限额)。但是,研究发现相关法律的适用存在严重矛盾。特别是,在刑事案件中提出的免于逮捕的财产问题(从清单中排除)的问题是通过民事诉讼程序解决的,该出版物的作者认为这是极其不可接受的。关于陈述的问题,主题分析了科学家的意见,科学家认为,在民事诉讼中可能允许就扣押财产的释放提出争议,包括根据案情实质解决刑事案件。提交人强烈不同意这一立场,并支持那些认为免除财产逮捕要求的专家(从清单中排除)提出的审查过的不予承认就实施逮捕的司法行为本身是无效的专家。在这方面,提交人援引了俄罗斯联邦宪法法院的法律立场,从中可以清楚地看出,人人享有司法保护的权利并不意味着可以选择公民的自由裁量权,技术和程序。司法保护,因为这种司法保护的特征是在特定的联邦法律中定义的。作者分析并赞赏哈萨克斯坦在法律许可方面的经验,该法律允许提起民事诉讼以免于刑事诉讼中扣押的财产。提交人指出,哈萨克斯坦共和国新的民事诉讼法已于2016年1月1日生效,清楚地表明,民事诉讼程序中的审议不受刑事起诉机构免予扣押财产的要求。结论。有必要对《俄罗斯民事诉讼法》第422条进行修正:该条不适用于以扣押财产的形式适用刑事诉讼强制措施的情况。除其他外,提交人提议对《俄罗斯刑事诉讼法》第115条第9部分进行增补。
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号