No 6 (2024)

The year 2024 commemorates the 180th anniversary of the birth of Anatoly Fedorovich Koni (1844–1927), a prominent lawyer, prosecutor, statesman, and public figure in post-reform Russia during the latter half of the 19th century. In this context, it appears fitting to reconsider the legacy of this iconic individual, whose life journey serves as a compelling testament to the challenging process of shaping and advancing the principles upon which the trial currently rests.

The aim of this study is to uncover the attributes of the present-day incorporation of A. F. Koni’s moral and ethical principles within the domestic legal framework.

Research methods. This study was based on general scientific methods (analysis and synthesis, etc.) and methods of legal science (historical-legal, formal-legal). The study is based on the theoretical works of domestic specialists who have studied the A. F. Koni’s legacy.

Study results. The moral concepts of A. F. Koni were formulated in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, wherein the fundamental tenets of administration of justice are enumerated: independence, irremovability, inviolability of judges, and openness of court proceedings. Moreover, the judge’s moral and ethical requirements coined by A. F. Koni were mirrored in the Law of the Russian Federation No. 3132-1 on the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation dated 26 June 1992. The Code of Judicial Ethics adopted in 2012 gains particular importance in the context of the analysis of A. F. Koni’s legacy. This document consistently and comprehensively outlines the principles of professional conduct for judges, as well as their involvement in activities pertaining to the advancement of law and legislation, implementation of legal practice, etc. It appears imperative to conduct further examination of A. F. Koni’s moral and ethical concepts to enhance the existing legislative instruments regulating judicial activities.

In this article, the authors considered the phenomenon of algorithmization of the process of generating solutions by artificial intelligence and the resulting problems of implementing the idea of “digital justice”, such as hallucinations of artificial intelligence and the inherent absence of a vector for the implementation of “digital justice” when evaluating evidence, exercising judicial discretion and applying evaluation categories.

The paper also provides a comparative analysis of experimental projects for the introduction and development of digital justice in different countries in recent years.

The article analyzes constitutional environmental responsibilities in the Russian Federation through the prism of constitutional justice. Their non-compliance entails adverse consequences for subjects of environmental law.

The purpose of the study is to identify topical issues that negatively affect compliance with constitutional environmental obligations in accordance with constitutional and legal norms, Russian legislation, as well as international law. The objectives of the study are to study constitutional environmental obligations in national and international law, to analyze the norms contained in the laws of the Russian Federation and international legal acts concerning compliance with environmental obligations, and to identify key problems related to them. Using the comparative legal method, the analysis of constitutional environmental obligations was carried out. In addition, logical and formal legal methods of scientific cognition were used.

The study examines some key aspects that have an adverse impact on compliance with constitutional environmental obligations, the doctrine of environmental law. It is revealed that in the Russian Federation, the duties in the field of ecology are the preservation of the environment and respect for natural resources, entrusted to all subjects of law. In accordance with the norms of international law, the element of the ecological and legal status of a legal entity considered by us is more characteristic of the State.

The study of problems in national and international law has led to the conclusion that in modern countries it is recognized that non-compliance with constitutional environmental obligations is due to a low level of environmental awareness, lack of understanding of legal responsibility and environmental nihilism.

The formulation of the research problem is a number of conflicting issues related to the use of materials from operational investigative activities when initiating disciplinary proceedings against judges.

The purpose of the study is to analyze the regulatory framework of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On operational investigative activities”, in particular, paragraph 2 of Article 14 “Use of materials of operational investigative activities” to initiate disciplinary proceedings against judges.

The objective of the study is to analyze the consequences of declassifying factual data (materials) obtained as a result of special operational investigative activities and transferring them to the disciplinary commission to initiate disciplinary proceedings against judges.

The research methods were carried out using a complex, including legal analysis and documentary analysis, based on the study of official documents, regulations and legal provisions governing judicial activities in the Republic of Kazakhstan. These methods make it possible to deeply analyze issues related to the violation of the secrecy of the judicial process as a result of the installation of special technical means, and to identify possible negative consequences for the legality and fairness of court decisions on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

As a result, it is noted that the selection and transfer of factual data (materials) for initiating disciplinary proceedings against judges can lead to the cancellation or change of sentences passed in conditions of secrecy of the verdict. Since, according to the regulatory legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan, interference in the activities of the court, as well as the subordination of judges to specific cases, is absolutely unacceptable, which entails legal liability in accordance with the law.

Thus, the authors come to the conclusion and propose to consider a direct ban on the use of the results of operational investigative activities to initiate disciplinary proceedings against judges. This proposal is aimed at preventing possible violations and restrictions of the Constitutional rights of a judge, as well as ensuring the legality and fairness of the disciplinary proceedings.

The judicial management of the civil process is considered through the legal category “civil procedural legal relationship”, the elements of the structure of individual civil procedural legal relations arising from the implementation of the court’s leading procedural activities are determined.

The methodological basis of the study was system analysis, formal logical method, analysis and synthesis.

According to the results of the study, the definition of judicial leadership as a subsystem of special procedural legal relations is formulated, the object, subject composition, content, and grounds for the emergence of a single (elementary) legal relationship that develops when the court implements guiding procedural actions are identified.

The object area of the study is the legal relations considered in the related normative construction of the principle of ensuring the right of the defendant to defense and his subjective right to questions in judicial interrogations, which arose on the basis of the Criminal Procedure Code of the RSFSR of 1960.

As the main method, normative scaling is used, based on the axiom of the normative similarity of different-sized legal constructions (the normative principle of ensuring the right of the defendant to defense and a separate rule on the right of the defendant to questions in court interrogations).

As a result of the study, the following conclusions are formulated. The implementation of the normative invariant that existed in the rule on ensuring the defendant’s right to personal defense by the court in the form of his use of questions during judicial interrogations did not have a complete concretization in the institute of questions during judicial interrogations. The large-scale normative object (the principle of criminal procedure) did not show full similarity in the rules on the questions of the defendant in judicial interrogations.

The absence of a complete similarity between the principle of ensuring the right to defense and the defendant’s right to questions may indicate a conflict of laws in the bilateral structure of legal relations (the defendant has the right, and the court is obliged to ensure this right), the need to consider the application of a tripartite model of legal relations in the current criminal procedure law, in which the court»s duty will be presented differently.

The article presents the results of an analysis of court decisions related to the application of the rules governing the judicial procedure for obtaining permission to cancel decisions to terminate a criminal case and criminal prosecution after one year from the date of their issuance (Part 1.1 of Article 214 and Article 214.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). Particular attention is paid to the courts’ interpretation of the grounds for granting a petition for permission to cancel decisions to terminate criminal prosecution, and their understanding of “new information that is subject to additional investigation”.

Specific examples from judicial practice show the motives for judges making relevant decisions. The issue of the admissibility of the results of operational-search activities as “new information” indicating the need to resume the criminal prosecution of a suspect or accused is specifically highlighted and considered.