MEETING OF THE WORKING GROUP ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AT THE MOSCOW BUSINESS OMBUDSMAN

Image module
28/11/2024, the Office of the Commissioner for the Protection of the Rights of Entrepreneurs in Moscow held a meeting of the Working Group on Criminal Procedure on the observance of constitutional rights and freedoms of entrepreneurs in criminal proceedings, which was attended by Tatyana Tsepkina.

 

The meeting was attended by representatives of the office of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Prosecutor’s Office of the City of Moscow, the Moscow Interregional Transport Prosecutor’s Office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in Moscow, the legal and expert community.

 

The participants of the Working Group discussed a proposal to amend Article 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation in terms of regulating the procedure for examining the scene of an accident on the premises of legal entities and individual entrepreneurs, in criminal cases of crimes provided for in Article 159 of parts one to four, 159.1 – 159.3, 159.5, 159.6, 160, 165 and 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, about amendments to Part 3 of art. 108 of the CPC in terms of the completeness of the materials submitted by the investigator in confirmation of the validity of the petition for the election of a preventive measure in the form of detention, on the development of methodological recommendations on the differentiation of criminal and civil liability and other topical issues of regulatory regulation of criminal procedure legislation.

 

Following the meeting, the participants of the event developed a number of proposals to improve law enforcement practice, taking into account the position of the courts.

 

The extensive practice of L&P in criminal cases confirms that when choosing a preventive measure in the form of detention, investigators submit to the courts case materials that actually do not contain evidence that the suspect/accused can escape. The discussion of this problem indicates its consistency and the need for defenders to use all procedural rights to appeal judicial acts issued on the basis of incomplete evidence,” says Tatyana Tsepkina.
div#stuning-header .dfd-stuning-header-bg-container {background-color: #5b80b0;background-size: initial;background-position: top center;background-attachment: initial;background-repeat: no-repeat;}#stuning-header div.page-title-inner {min-height: 300px;}