Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

Yarovenko V.V., Korchagin A.G. Pre-trial agreement to cooperate: status, issues, prospects

Abstract: This article gives a detailed examination to the issues of pre-trial agreement to cooperate. The authors present a brief analysis of the problematic issues of the legal regulation of this institution that emerged as a necessity for counteracting organized forms of crime, which has high latency and loyalty among its members. The idea of deals, made between the defense and the prosecution during the first stages of judicial process, is rather promising, as it simplifies and eases the process of the court proceedings, and reflects the tasks of preliminary investigation on establishing all circumstances of the criminal act with simultaneous increase in efficiency of counteraction of the criminal activity as a whole. The materials of the investigative and prosecutorial practice confirmed that the cooperating suspects and defendants are in fact parties to organized crimes with the following qualifications: “group of people”, “group of people based on conspiracy”, “organized group”. The authors make the conclusion that the Chapter 40.1 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation does not contain the positions on the specificity of protection of the rights of the victim in cases of cooperation with a suspect (defendant) of the pre-trial cooperation agreement.


Keywords:

responsibility, prosecutor, suspect, accused, victim, petition, court, pre-trial agreement, punishment, sentence


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article


References
1. Khamidullin R.S. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve - ob'ektivnaya istina ili kompromiss? // Yuridicheskie issledovaniya. - 2016. - 3. - C. 16 - 22. DOI: 10.7256/2409-7136.2016.3.17925. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/lr/article_17925.html
2. Khamidullin R.S. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve kak taktiko-kriminalisticheskiy element bor'by s organizovannoy prestupnost'yu // Soyuz kriminalistov i kriminologov. - 2014. - 3. - C. 250 - 255. DOI: 10.7256/2310-8681.2014.4.15610.
3. Khamidullin R.S. Nekotorye osobennosti rassledovaniya ugolovnykh del v sluchae primeneniya norm osobogo ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva pri zaklyuchenii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Politseyskaya i sledstvennaya deyatel'nost'. - 2015. - 3. - C. 9 - 16. DOI: 10.7256/2409-7810.2015.3.15617. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/pm/article_15617.html
4. Stovpovoy A.. Tyunin V. Ugolovno-pravovoy i ugolovno-protsessual'nyy aspekty dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve na predvaritel'nom sledstvii // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, ¹3. S.118-123.
5. Grankin K., Mil'tova E. Problemy primeneniya norm UPK RF, reguliruyushchikh dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, ¹3, S. 76-79.
6. Machul'skaya E.A. Yuridicheskie aspekty yavki s povinnoy // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, 2008, ¹9, S. 142-151.
7. Blagov E. Naznachenie nakazaniya v sluchae zaklyucheniya dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, ¹3, S. 21-26.
8. Zhuravleva E. Yavka s povinnoy v sudebnoy praktike, kak obstoyatel'stvo, smyagchayushchee nakazanie osuzhdennogo // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2007, ¹5, S. 30-32.
9. Ivanov A. Rekomendatsii Plenuma Verkhovnogo Suda RF o primenenii ch.6 st. 15 UK // Zakonnost', 2014, ¹8. S. 39-40.
10. Aleksandrov A.S., Kuchin A.F., Smolin A.G. Pravovaya priroda instituta, reglamentirovannogo glavoy 40 UPK RF // Ros. sud'ya, 2007, ¹7, S. 17.
11. Pavlova E.Yu. Osnovaniya i usloviya izmeneniya kategorii prestupleniya na menee tyazhkuyu // Zakonodatel'stvo, 2014, ¹2, S. 57-64.
12. Vinitskiy L., Kubrikova M. Vozmozhno li izmenenie kategorii pri rassmotrenii ugolovnogo dela v poryadke glavy 40.1 UPK RF? // Zakonnost', 2013, ¹3, S. 42-45.
13. Morozov V. Ugolovno-pravovoe obespechenie instituta dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve: problemy i resheniya // Ugolovnoe prava, 2010, ¹1, S. 22-24.
14. Meshkov M.V., Goncharov V.V. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve: problemy i perspektivy // Zakon i pravo, 2011, ¹1, S. 92-93.
15. Khaliulin A., Bulanova N., Konyarova Zh. Polnomochiya prokurora po zaklyucheniyu dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, ¹3, S. 98-102.
16. Novikov S.A. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve kak osnovanie dlya vydeleniya ugolovnogo dela // Ros. sud'ya, 2012, ¹11, s. 21-24.
17. Smirnov A.V. Osobyy poryadok praktiki sudebnogo resheniya, pri zaklyuchenii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnyy protsess, 2009, ¹10, S. 5-14.
18. Loshkobanova Ya.V. Obespechenie prav i zakonnykh interesov podozrevaemogo, obvinyaemogo i poterpevshego pri zaklyuchenii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve. Avtoref. kand. yurid. nauk. – Krasnodar, 2015, S. 23.
19. Chabukiani O.A. Garantii prav poterpevshikh pri zaklyuchenii storonoy obvineniya dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve s podozrevaemym (obvinyaemym) // Ros. yustitsiya, 2012, ¹4, S. 35-36.
20. Khomitskaya T.P. Kommentariy k postanovleniyu Plenuma Verkhovnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii o primenenii sudami norm glavy 401 UPK RF // Ugolovnyy protsess. 2012. ¹ 9. S. 76.
21. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve. Problemy sovershenstvovaniya / Pod red. F.F. Zinnurova, G.B. Mirzoeva. – M..: YuNITI DANA: Zakon i pravo, 2014, S. 21-27.
22. Timoshenko A. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve s otsenkoy effektivnosti protsessual'nogo instituta // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2011, ¹4, S. 105-111.
23. Grichanichenko A. Osobyy poryadok prinyatiya sudebnogo resheniya: sravnitel'nyy analiz soderzhaniya glavy 40 i 40.1 UPK RF, problemy ikh primeneniya // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, ¹1. S. 81-85.
24. Abshchilava G. Kombinatorika ugolovno-protsessual'nykh form pri realizatsii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnoe pravo, 2010, ¹3, S. 73-75.
25. Postanovlenie Plenuma Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 22 dekabrya 2015 g. ¹ 58 «O praktike naznacheniya sudami Rossiyskoy Federatsii ugolovnogo nakazaniya» http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=LAW;n=190932;fld=134;dst=1000000001,0;rnd=0.5017763487749336
26. Manova N.S. Uproshchennye sudebnye protsedury i sdelki o priznanii viny // Zakon, 2009. ¹1, S. 69-73.
27. Golovko L.V. Institut ugolovno-pravovoy mediatsii i ego perspektivy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii // Zakon, 2009, ¹4, S. 127-135.
28. Gurshumov I. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve – sdelka s pravosudiem? // Zakonnost', 2010, ¹4. S. 36-37.
29. Postanovlenie Plenuma Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 28 iyunya 2012 g ¹16 «O praktike primeneniya sudami osobogo poryadka sudebnogo razbiratel'stva ugolovnykh del pri zaklyuchenii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Byulleten' Verkhovnogo Suda RF, 2012, ¹9. S. 2-5.
30. Dneprovskaya M., Stepanenko D. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnoe pravo. – M.: ANO "Yuridicheskie programmy", 2013, ¹ 4.-S. 90-95.
31. Ugolovnyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii ot 13.06.1996 ¹ 63-FZ (red. ot 30.12.2015). – M.: Prospekt, KnoRus, 2015.
32. Ugolovno-protsessual'nyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii ot 18.12. 2001 ¹ 174-FZ (red. ot 02. 03.2016). – M.: Prospekt, KnoRus, 2016.
33. Aleksandrov A.S.. Aleksandrova I.A. Soglashenie o dosudebnom sotrudnichestve so sledstviem: pravovaya sushchnost' i voprosy tolkovaniya norm, vkhodyashchikh v glavu 40.1 UPK RF // Ugolovnyy protsess, 2009, ¹8, S. 3-11.
34. Federal'nyy zakon ot 29 iyunya 2009 g. ¹141-FZ «O vnesenii izmeneniy v Ugolovnyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii i Ugolovno-protsessual'nyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federatsii» // Sobranie zakonodatel'stva RF, 2009, ¹26, St. 3139.