Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Reasoning of Judicial Decisions in Criminal Proceedings

View through CrossRef
Based on the analysis of the doctrine of criminal procedure law, the positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the authors, using dialectical, sociological and formal logical methods, identify the main requirements for reasoning of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings. The importance of reasoning of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings is considered. The results of the study make it possible to conclude that a reasoned court decision allows participants to the process to understand and evaluate the reasons for its issuance. The reasonableness of the court decision is an indispensable condition for a fair trial and fair justice in general. Proper reasoning of a judicial decision allows ensuring the right to appeal it to a higher court. The reasons, for which the decisions were made, as well as the rationale for their adoption, allow you to appeal these arguments and conclusions of the court.The most common cases of violation of the most important rights of participants in criminal proceedings when making court decisions and reasoning them are: unreasoned refusal to attach evidence; unreasoned detention; unreasoned disclosure of testimony of witnesses absent from the court session; unreasoned «secrecy» of witnesses; unreasoned decisions on complaints of ill-treatment, illegal methods of investigation.The content of the reasoning of the court decision depends on its nature. The highest degree of reasoning and persuasiveness should be the final court decisions that resolve the criminal law conflict in essence, as well as decisions that most significantly affect the most important constitutional rights of citizens. The reasoning of court decisions increases the degree of public confidence in the court and the transparency of justice.
Kutafin Moscow State Law University
Title: Reasoning of Judicial Decisions in Criminal Proceedings
Description:
Based on the analysis of the doctrine of criminal procedure law, the positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the authors, using dialectical, sociological and formal logical methods, identify the main requirements for reasoning of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings.
The importance of reasoning of judicial decisions in criminal proceedings is considered.
The results of the study make it possible to conclude that a reasoned court decision allows participants to the process to understand and evaluate the reasons for its issuance.
The reasonableness of the court decision is an indispensable condition for a fair trial and fair justice in general.
Proper reasoning of a judicial decision allows ensuring the right to appeal it to a higher court.
The reasons, for which the decisions were made, as well as the rationale for their adoption, allow you to appeal these arguments and conclusions of the court.
The most common cases of violation of the most important rights of participants in criminal proceedings when making court decisions and reasoning them are: unreasoned refusal to attach evidence; unreasoned detention; unreasoned disclosure of testimony of witnesses absent from the court session; unreasoned «secrecy» of witnesses; unreasoned decisions on complaints of ill-treatment, illegal methods of investigation.
The content of the reasoning of the court decision depends on its nature.
The highest degree of reasoning and persuasiveness should be the final court decisions that resolve the criminal law conflict in essence, as well as decisions that most significantly affect the most important constitutional rights of citizens.
The reasoning of court decisions increases the degree of public confidence in the court and the transparency of justice.

Related Results

The Role of the Judiciary in Constitutional Interpretation in Pakistan
The Role of the Judiciary in Constitutional Interpretation in Pakistan
This study examines the evolving role of the judiciary in Pakistan in interpreting the Constitution, exploring how the courts have come to terms with their position as the primary ...
Przestępca zawodowy
Przestępca zawodowy
 The article seeks to sum up all that has been said on the subject of professional criminality in the past half-century. It was never any part of the author’s aim to offer an analy...
Participation In Crimal Acts According In Islamic Criminal Law
Participation In Crimal Acts According In Islamic Criminal Law
<p>The current Research This research aims to explore the views of Islamic criminal law in relation to the the concept of participation in a criminal offense. The research me...
Judicial Review Oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi: Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint dalam Perspektif Kebebasan Kehakiman
Judicial Review Oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi: Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint dalam Perspektif Kebebasan Kehakiman
The discourse between the application of judicial activism or judicial restraint has become a hot issue of judicial review authority where recently the Constitutional Court through...
Consideration As A Criminal Sanction
Consideration As A Criminal Sanction
In the list of types of liability traditionally distinguished in the legal system of Armenia, procedural, including criminal, liability was not included. The 1998 edition of the RA...
Assurance of Evidence
Assurance of Evidence
Abstract This paper reflects the detailed theoretical and interpretative treatments of criminal evidence and the process of proving according to criminal procedural legislation...

Back to Top