, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
UDK 34 Право. Юридические науки
GRNTI 10.79 Уголовно-процессуальное право (уголовный процесс)
The article iis devoted to the research of the institution of investigative judge introduced into the criminal procedure of the Kyrgyz Republic in 2019. The authors analyze the conceptual foundations of this institution, its procedural significance, as well as the legal model under Kyrgyz legislation in its comparative perspective with the legislation of Germany and some former Soviet republics. Two main achievements: the organizational and functional isolation of an investigating judge during the criminal procedure and granting them the power of deposition are seen by the authors as advantages of the Kyrgyz model of the institution of an investigative judge. The former is aimed at guaranteeing the objectivity, impartiality and neutrality of the judge considering the case on the merits, who is discharged judicial control in pre-trial procedure nowadays. The latter is aimed at implementing for the prosecution and defense the right to be equal parties of procedural opportunities to participate in evidence as an integral element of the adversarial principle.
investigating judge, judicial control, pre-trial procedure, adversarial principle, implementing for the prosecution and defense the right to be equal parties
1. Adilov S. A. Sledstvennyy sud'ya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve Respubliki Kazahstan // Trudy Akademii upravleniya MVD Rossii. – 2017. – № 1. – S. 119–125.
2. Grigor'ev V. N., Zinchenko I. A., Popov A. P. Komparativistskie zametki ob institute sledstvennogo sud'i v dosudebnom ugolovnom proizvodstve // Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yusticiya. – 2016. – № 1. – S. 13–19
3. Gus'kova A. P. Processual'no-pravovye i organizacionnye voprosy podgotovki k sudebnomu zasedaniyu po UPK RF : monografiya. – Orenburg: OGU, 2002. – 107 s.
4. Zor'kin V. D. Konstituciya zhivet v zakonah. Rezervy povysheniya kachestva rossiyskogo zakonodatel'stva // Zhurnal konstitucionnogo pravosudiya. – 2015. – № 3. – S. 1–5.
5. Kanafin D. K. Soblyudenie principa sostyazatel'nosti, ravenstva storon i prava na zaschitu v ugolovnom processe [Elektronnyy resurs] // Sayt «Yurist – Paragraf» – Rezhim dostupa: https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=37826422#pos=3;-110 (data obrascheniya: 15.04.2019).
6. Kovtun N. N. Sudebnyy kontrol' v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve Rossii. – N. Novgorod: Nizhegorodskaya pravovaya akademiya, 2002. – 331 s.
7. Kogamov M. Ch. Voprosy processual'nogo obespecheniya osuschestvleniya pravosudiya. / Sudebno-pravovaya reforma: problemy i perspektivy razvitiya zakonodatel'nogo obespecheniya: materialy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferencii. – Astana: Zhetі Zhargy, 2000. – S. 36–37.
8. Kuznecov A. P., Kovtun N. N. Sudebnyy kontrol' zakonnosti i obosnovannosti zaderzhaniya podozrevaemogo // Rossiyskiy sud'ya. – 2004. – № 5. – S. 8–10.
9. Morschakova T. G. Sudebnaya reforma : sbornik obzorov. – Moskva: INION, 1990. – S. 30
10. Tomin V. T., Polyakov M. P., Popov A. P. Ocherki teorii effektivnogo ugolovnogo processa. – Pyatigorsk, 2000. – 239 s.
11. Haliulin A., Nazarenko V. Ot prokurorskogo nadzora k sudebnomu kontrolyu // Zakonnost'. – 2004. – № 1. – S. 24–28.
