COMPARATIVE-LEGAL ANALYSIS OF SECURITY MEASURES IN CRIMINAL, ARBITRATION, CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The novelty of the article is determined by the consideration in it of the ratio of measures of procedural coercion, interim measures of the arbitral tribunal, measures to secure a claim in civil proceedings and measures for the preliminary protection of administrative proceedings. The purpose of this comparative analysis is to determine the unity of their legal nature, the identification of identical and similar elements, the discovery of reasonable and unjustified industry specific differences. The tasks were the comparison of goals, methods, procedure, subject composition and other elements of the institutions of arbitration, civil procedural, administrative and criminal procedure. The central method of research was a comparative legal method. As a result of the study, the proximity of legal regulation of law-enforcement measures in arbitration, civil and administrative proceedings was revealed, and a significant difference in the criminal process. Unjustified differences in the subject composition of the initiators of the application of interim measures were discovered, and there was no possibility of counter provision in criminal proceedings. In conclusion, measures for the inter-process unification of the legal institution under consideration are proposed.

About the authors

A. R. Sharipova

Department of Criminal Law and Procedure, Bashkir State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: grigorjewa.katerina@yandex.ru
Russian Federation

References

  1. Polyansky N. N., Strogovich M. S., Savitsky V. M., Melnikov A. A. Problemy sudebnogo prava [Problems of judicial law]. M.: Nauka, 1983, 224 p. [in Russian].
  2. Guskova A. P. Sudebnaia vlast’ i mekhanizm ee realizatsii posredstvom sudebnogo prava [Judicial power and the mechanism for its implementation through judicial law]. Problemy prava [Issues of Law], 2015, no. 2, pp. 137–139 [in Russian]
  3. Muradian E. M. Sudebnoe pravo [Judiciary law]. SPb.: Iurid. tsentr Press, 2007, 575 p. [in Russian].
  4. Sharipova A. R. Otvod sud’i: naskol’ko opravdany mezhotraslevye razlichiia [Removal of the judge: interindustry distinctions are how justified?]. Evraziiskaia advokatura [Eurasian Advocacy], 2017, no. 4, pp. 81–85. Available at: http://www.eng.eurasian-advocacy.ru/4-29-2017/1240-content-of-number [in Russian].
  5. Sharipova A. R. Dokazyvanie v ugolovnom i arbitrazhnom protsessakh: nevynuzhdennye razlichiia [Proving in criminal and arbitration processes: «unconstrained» distinctions]. Biblioteka kriminalista [Criminalist’s Library], 2015, no. 4, pp. 180–185. Avialable at: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=24255846 [in Russian].
  6. Trezubov E. S. Vstrechnoe obespechenie v arbitrazhnom protsesse Rossii: ot realii k edinomu Grazhdanskomu protsessual’nomu kodeksu [Counter collateral in the arbitration process of Russia: from the realities to the unified Civil Procedure Code]. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa [Herald of Civil Procedure], 2017, no. 6. Available at legal reference system «ConsultantPlus». Available at: http://civpro.org/ru/archive/102/2425. DOI: http://doi.org/10.24031/2226-
  7. -2017-7-6-170-[in Russian].
  8. Tarasov A. A. Osnovaniia protsessual’nogo prinuzhdeniia i prezumptsiia nevinovnosti [Grounds for procedural coercion and the presumption of innocence]. Zakony Rossii [Laws of Russia], 2018, no. 5, pp. 37–42 [in Russian].
  9. Pamiatniki rossiiskogo prava. Ugolovno-protsessual’nye kodeksy RSFSR. Pod obshch. red. V. A. Lazarevoi, R. L. Khachaturova [Monuments of Russian law. Criminal Procedural Codes of the RSFSR. V. A. Lazareva, R. L. Khachaturov (Eds.)]. M.: Iurlitinform, 2016, 608 p. [in Russian].
  10. Nikolyuk V. V. Privod, zaderzhanie i zakliuchenie pod strazhu osuzhdennogo, skryvshegosia v tseliakh ukloneniia ot otbyvaniia nakazaniia [Drive, detention and imprisonment of a convict who disappeared for the purpose of evading punishment]. M.: RGUP, 2018, 170 p. [in Russian].
  11. Solovyev S. A. Mekhanicheskoe uravnivanie prav poterpevshego i obviniaemogo (podozrevaemogo) kak otritsatel’naia tendentsiia v razvitii otechestvennogo ugolovnogo protsessa [Mechanical equalization of the rights of the victim and the accused (the suspect) as a negative trend in the development of the domestic criminal process]. In: Strategii razvitiia ugolovno-protsessual’nogo prava v XXI v.: materialy
  12. V mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii 10–noiabria 2016 g. (g. Moskva) [Strategies for the development of criminal procedural law in the XXI century: Proceedings of the V International Research and Practical Conference on November 10–11, 2016 (Moscow)]. M.: RGUP, 2017, 323 p. [in Russian].
  13. Andreyeva O. I. O pravakh poterpevshego kak uchastnika ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [On the rights of the victim as a participant in criminal proceedings]. In: Pravovye problemy ukrepleniia rossiiskoi gosudarstvennosti: sb. statei [Legal problems of strengthening Russian statehood: Collection of articles]. Tomsk, 2018, pp. 7–8 [in Russian]
  14. Volodina L. M. Naznachenie ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva i problemy ego realizatsii: monografiia [Appointment of criminal proceedings and problems of its implementation: monograph]. M.: Iurlitinform, 2018, 296 p. [in Russian].
  15. Teterina T. Otkaz prokurora ot obvineniia «prestupaet» prava poterpevshikh na dostup k pravosudiiu [The prosecutor’s refusal to prosecute «transgresses» the rights of victims to access to justice]. Rossiiskaia iustitsiia [Russian Justitia], 2003, no. 10. Available at legal reference system «ConsultantPlus»
  16. [in Russian].

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2018 Sharipova A.R.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies