Conclusion of a pre-trial cooperation agreement: criminal procedural and forensic problems

The Institute of pre-trial agreement has been actively used in the practice of law enforcement agencies of Russia since 2009, but there are still many problems with its use. The pre-trial agreement cannot be applied everywhere in all crimes without exception, but only in the detection and investigation of its organized and most dangerous forms. The initiative to apply the pre-trial agreement should belong to law enforcement agencies, i.e. the investigator and the Prosecutor. The essence of the pre-trial agreement between the offender and the prosecution should be based on mutual contractual obligations, which should be clearly spelled out in the text of the agreement with a guarantee of their execution, especially by the state. This, in turn, requires that the pre-trial agreement be approved in court with the participation of interested parties to the criminal process. The decision of the sentence by the court in a special order under the pre-trial agreement shall be after consideration by the court of the main criminal case in the General order.

Keywords

agreement, plea agreement, punishment, obligation, procedure, Prosecutor, investigation, investigator, promotion, court

Received

26.02.2019

Publication date

27.02.2019

Number of characters

37009

Cite

GOST	Khalikov A. Conclusion of a pre-trial cooperation agreement: criminal procedural and forensic problems // Gosudarstvo i pravo – 2019. – Issue 2 C. 61-70 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/gp/s013207690003852-9-1-en (circulation date: 26.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S013207690003852-9
MLA	Khalikov, Aslyam "Conclusion of a pre-trial cooperation agreement: criminal procedural and forensic problems." Gosudarstvo i pravo 2 (2019):61-70. DOI: 10.31857/S013207690003852-9
APA	Khalikov A. (2019). Conclusion of a pre-trial cooperation agreement: criminal procedural and forensic problems. Gosudarstvo i pravo (2), pp.61-70 DOI: 10.31857/S013207690003852-9

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 1619

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Abshilava G.V. Kombinatorika ugolovno-processual'nyh form pri realizacii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2010. ¹ 3. S. 73 ? 75.

2. Aleksandrov A. Podhod k preodoleniyu protivorechiya v zakone, reglamentiruyushchego zaklyuchenie i realizaciyu dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve po ugolovnomu delu // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2011. ¹ 1. S. 54 ? 57.

3. Baev M.O., Baev O. Ya. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve: sredi mifov i rifov // SPS Konsul'tantPlyus. 2010.

4. Bol'shoj tolkovyj slovar' russkogo yazyka. SPb., 1998. S. 1228.

5. Vinnickij L.V., Kubrikova M.E. Aktual'nye voprosy instituta dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve. M., 2015. S. 62 ? 64.

6. Golovizin M.V. Osobyj poryadok prinyatiya sudebnogo resheniya pri zaklyuchenii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve: avtoref dis. kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2012. S. 15.

7. Grichanichenko A. Osobyj poryadok prinyatiya sudebnogo resheniya: sravnitel'nyj analiz soderzhaniya glavy 40 i glavy 40-1 UPK RF, problemy primeneniya // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2010. ¹ 1. S. 81 ? 85.

8. Davletov A.A. Ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo Rossijskoj Federacii: kurs lekcij. Ekaterinburg, 2013. S. 265.

9. Dudina N.A. K voprosu o prednaznachenii instituta dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Ross. sud'ya. 2014. ¹ 4. S. 8 ? 10.

10. Kasatkina S.A. Priznanie obvinyaemogo. M., 2010. S. 199, 200.

11. Kommentarij k Ugolovnomu kodeksu Rossijskoj Federacii / pod obshch. red. Yu.I. Skuratova i V.M. Lebedeva. M., 1999. S. 126.

12. Konin V.V. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve: nekotorye kriticheskie zamechaniya // Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve (pravovye i kriminalisticheskie problemy): materialy nauch.-prakt. konf. Vyp. 6 / otv. red. O.Ya. Baev. Voronezh, 2010. S. 166.

13. Kubrikova M.E. Aktual'nye voprosy instituta dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve: avtoref. dis. kand. yurid. nauk. Chelyabinsk, 2013. S. 6, 7.

14. Mal'ko A.V. Stimuly i ogranicheniya v prave. M., 2004. S. 227.

15. Maslova Yu. A. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve na fone bespristrastnogo suda // Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve (pravovye i kriminalisticheskie problemy): materialy nauch.-prakt. konf. Vyp. 6 / otv. red. O.Ya. Baev. Voronezh, 2010. S. 188.

16. Ozhegov S.I., Shvedova N. Yu. Tolkovyj slovar' russkogo yazyka. M., 2003. S. 742.

17. Tertyshnaya O.A. Ugolovno-processual'nyj mekhanizm dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve: dis. kand. yurid. nauk. Voronezh. 2014. S. 118 ? 125.

18. Timoshenko A. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve: ocenka effektivnosti processual'nogo instituta // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2011. ¹ 4. S. 110.

19. Tishin R.V. Realizaciya konstitucionnogo principa pravosudie v Rossijskoj Federacii osushchestvlyaetsya tol'ko sudom v polozheniyah dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve // Mirovoj sud'ya. 2010. ¹ 11. S. 4 ? 7.

20. Tkachev I., Tisen O. Sravnitel'nyj analiz pravovoj reglamentacii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve i osobogo poryadka sudebnogo razbiratel'stva v rossijskom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2011. ¹ 1. S. 83.

21. Haliullin A., Bulanov N., Konyarova Zh. Polnomochiya prokurora po zaklyucheniyu dosudebnogo soglasheniya // Ugolovnoe pravo. 2010. ¹ 3. S. 98 ? 102.

22. Shatalov A.S. Zaklyuchenie dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve: pravovaya reglamentaciya, dostoinstva i nedostatki // Zhurnal ross. prava. 2010. ¹ 5. S. 36.