Ðóñ Eng Cn 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:

Nasonov S.A., Maksimova T.Yu. Criminal procedural guarantees of defendant’s right to not testify against themselves: analysis of the issues of legal precedent in cases of both, judge and jury trials

Abstract: This article examines the issue of procedural guarantees of defendant’s right to not testify against themselves. The article reveals the constitutional and international legal basis for this right, and analyzes the key positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. The authors note that the aforementioned right covers all statements made by the defendant regardless of their incriminating nature. A special attention is given to the analysis of the legal precedent, where the evidence acquired in violation of this right (protocols of verification of statements on the scene, confrontational questioning) are still deemed admissible. The work determines the prerequisites for such approach and underlines its contradictions with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. Particularly during the trial by jury, it is important to explain the full and precise meaning to the jurors of the right of the defendant to not testify against themselves.


Keywords:

Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, European Court, criminal case, self-incrimination, accused, procedural guarantees, evidence, judicial practice, confrontation, trial by jury


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

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Asnis A.Ya., Kravchenko D.V. O nekotorykh voprosakh, svyazannykh s konstitutsionnym pravom ne svidetel'stvovat' protiv sebya, v rossiyskoy ugolovnoy pravoprimenitel'noy praktike// Vestnik advokatskoy palaty Kirovskoy oblasti. 2015. ¹ 6.
2. Zemtsova A.V. Sposob polucheniya svidetel'skikh pokazaniy kak uslovie ikh dopustimosti // Rossiyskiy sledovatel'. 2009. ¹ 21.
3. Nasonov S.A. Naputstvennoe slovo predsedatel'stvuyushchego v sude prisyazhnykh. M.: R. Valent, 2006.
4. Opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF ot 16 dek. 2004 g. ¹ 448-O «Ob otkaze v prinyatii k rassmotreniyu zaprosa Cherkesskogo gorodskogo suda Karachaevo-Cherkesskoy Respubliki o proverke konstitutsionnosti punkta 2 chasti 4 stat'i 46 i punkta 3 chasti 4 stat'i 47 Ugolovno-protsessual'nogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii»// SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus».
5. Opredelenie Verkhovnogo Suda RF ot 3 iyunya 2005 g. N 82-o05-13 // SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus».
6. Postanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo Cuda Rossiyskoy Federatsii ot 25 aprelya 2001 g. N 6-P// SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus».
7. Postanovlenie Evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka ot 5 noyabrya 2002 g. po delu "Allan (Allan) protiv Soedinennogo Korolevstva" (zhaloba N 48539/99) // Byulleten' Evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka. 2003. N 4.
8. Postanovlenie ESPCh po delu «Beklz protiv Soedinennogo Korolevstva» (Beckles v. the United Kingdom) ot 8 oktyabrya 2002 g. // SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus».
9. Postanovlenie ESPCh po delu «Kondron protiv Soedinennogo Korolevstva» (Condron v. the United Kingdom) ot 2 maya 2000 g. // SPS «Konsul'tantPlyus».
10. Postanovlenie ESPCh po delu «Saunders protiv Soedinennogo Korolevstva» (Saunders v. United Kingdom) ot 17 dekabrya 1996 g. Evropeyskiy Sud po pravam cheloveka. Izbrannye resheniya. T.2. M.,2000.
11. Porubov N.I. Taktika doprosa na predvaritel'nom sledstvii. M., 1998.
12. Savitskiy V.M., Larin A.M. Ugolovnyy protsess: Slovar'-spravochnik. M., 1999.
13. Teterin B.S., Troshkin E.Z. Vozbuzhdenie i rassledovanie ugolovnykh del. M., 1997.
14. Ugolovnoe delo ¹ 1-243/2015. Arkhiv Taganskogo rayonnogo suda g. Moskvy.