Author

GRACHEV S.A.

Title of article

TO THE QUESTION OF DIRECT ACTION OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

Section

Section 2. Human rights protection

Issue, year

4 (46) 2018

Abstract

Despite the fact that the Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted25 years ago, the provision concerning the direct action of its norms is not always implemented by the officials and bodies conducting criminal proceedings. The author of the article notes that the mechanism
for exercising the right to protection of a person whose legitimate interests can be significantly affectedby the actions carried out to verify the reported crime is not defined by the legislation. It also applies to
reporting a confession. The legal regime of inspecting the dwelling in which the crime was committed, in case the persons living in it are absent, creates obstacles to law enforcement activities. The author
comes to the conclusion that despite the development of certain provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the legislation, as well as the decisions of the Supreme Court of the Russian
Federation and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation do not contain a comprehensive mechanism to ensure the constitutional rights and freedoms of the individual. This results in their
restriction. Due to these circumstances, it is stated that the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation do not always have direct effect in criminal proceedings.

Keywords

Constitution of the Russian Federation; direct action; criminal proceedings; verification of reported crime; rights and freedoms; investigative actions.

References

1. Krasnov M.A. Kryazhkov V.A. Tolkoviy slovar’ konstitutsionnyh terminov i ponyatiy [Explanatory dictionary of constitutional terms and concepts]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. tsentr Press Publ., 2004.
2. Panokin A.M. Poryadok rassmotreniya soobshcheniya o prestuplenii v ugolovnom protsesse [The procedure for considering a crime report in a criminal procedure]. Aktual’nye problemy rossiyskogo prava – Actual problems of Russian law, 2013, no. 11.

3. Terehin V.V. Dopustimost’ materialov proverki kak dokazatel’stv [Admissibility of evidence materials as evidence]. Rossiyskiy sledovatel’ – Russian investigator, 2013, no. 13.

4. Dolya E. Pravovoe znachenie rezul’tatov glasnyh operativno-rozysknyh meropriyatiy dlya ugolovnogo dela i reformy ugolovnogo protsessa [The legal significance of the results of public investigative measures for the criminal case and the reform of the criminal process]. Zakonnost’ – Legality, 2011, no. 4, pp. 16-22.

5. Kravets I.P. Organizatsiya pervonachal’nogo i posleduyushchego etapa rassledovaniya prestupleniy, svyazannyh s terroristicheskimi aktami, sovershennymi posredstvom vzryvov [The organization of the initial and subsequent phase of the investigation of crimes related to terrorist acts committed by explosions]. Probely v
rossiyskom zakonodatel’stve – Gaps in Russian legislation, 2015, no. 1, pp. 195-199.

6. Stel’mah V.Yu. Ob”yasneniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: pravovaya priroda, protsessual’niy poryadok polucheniya, dokazatel’stvennoe znachenie [Explanations in criminal proceedings: legal nature, procedural procedure for obtaining, evidentiary value]. Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Ser. “Ekonomika i pravo” – Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series “Economics and Law”, 2016, no. 5, pp. 148-149.

7. Lazareva V.A. Nekotorye voprosy realizatsii uchastnikami ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva konstitutsionnogo prava na poluchenie kvalifitsirovannoy yuridicheskoy pomoshchi [Some issues of the implementation by participants in criminal proceedings of the constitutional right to receive qualified legal assistance]. Federal’noe
zakonodatel’stvo ob advokature: praktika primeneniya i problemy sovershenstvovaniya [Federal legislation on the bar: application practice and problems of improvement]. Ekaterinburg, Ural State University Press, 2004. Pp. 183-184