The concept of the judicial reform of 1991 aims to create an effective, reliable, democratic judicial system in Russia. The authors of the Concept proposed global changes in the judicial system of Russia and options for improving the criminal procedural policy of the state. Since the state of law and order was unsatisfactory at the time of the reform, it became necessary to introduce systemic changes in the mechanism of criminal procedure regulation. However, the main objective of the reform was to establish an independent judiciary, the main function of which is the administration of justice.
The need for reform
The drafters of the Judicial Reform Concept came to the conclusion that by 1991 the law enforcement activities of the courts, prosecutors and investigative authorities had lost their effectiveness. The Concept provides statistics on crimes committed in the USSR in 1990. The number of recorded crimes has increased compared to previous years. In addition, the number of unsolved crimes has increased.
In addition to the insolvency of law enforcement agencies, the Concept addresses the issue of observing the constitutional rights of citizens in legal proceedings. The authors indicate that the activities of Soviet courts and investigative bodies have an accusatory bias. This is confirmed by the low percentage of acquittals handed down by Soviet courts.
Prerequisites for Reform
In the 1980s The Supreme Soviet of the USSR adopted the Basics of legislation on the judicial system. Attempts were made to reform the judicial system existing in the USSR, but they did not lead to the desired result. The foundations of the legislation helped shape the challenges of future judicial reform.
12/15/1990, it was decided to create the Constitutional Court of the RSFSR. In 1991, arbitration courts appeared. The Decree of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR of October 24, 1991 approved the Concept of reform, taken as the basis for the subsequent development of the Russian judicial system.
Reform objectives
The reform was aimed at creating a federal judicial system in the new independent republic - the RSFSR. The court was to become an independent and independent branch of government. In addition, the RSFSR waged a political struggle with the allied power structures.
According to the concept of the 1991 Concept, the main tasks of judicial reform in the Russian Federation are:
- affirmation of the sovereignty of the RSFSR in the administration of justice in its territory in accordance with its own laws;
- creation of conditions for the realization of the rights and freedoms of participants in legal proceedings;
- separation of the court as an independent branch of government;
- establishing the rule of law in the law enforcement system;
- democratization of criminal and civil proceedings;
- ensuring the availability of information on law enforcement and judicial statistics.
The judicial system of Russia
The main objective of judicial reform in the Russian Federation has been achieved. A federal constitutional law on the judiciary appeared. The new independent judiciary was established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation. These regulations state that justice in Russia is carried out only by the courts. There are 4 procedural forms for the administration of justice: constitutional, administrative, civil and criminal proceedings. Judicial power is established only in accordance with the Constitution and the FKZ.
The system consists of federal, constitutional (charter) and magistrates courts. Judges and jurors are independent in their decisions and are guided only by the Constitution of the Russian Federation. All judges in Russia have the same status, but different competencies. The decisions of the courts of the Russian Federation that have entered into force are subject to compliance throughout its territory.
Not all proposals of the 1991 Concept of Judicial Reform have been included in this crucial law. For example, the idea of creating new judicial districts different from the administrative-territorial units of the Russian Federation was ignored. According to the plan of the reformers, this approach will ensure the independence of the court from regional authorities. The division of power into judicial, legislative and executive should exist not only at the level of the federation, but also its subjects.
Organization of the activities of the courts
On June 26, 1992, the Law on the Status of Judges was adopted. It aims to assert the independence of the judiciary. The normative act provides guarantees for judges to ensure their independence. The Higher Qualification Collegium of Judges has appeared. Its functions are the formation of the judiciary, the imposition of disciplinary responsibility, the protection of independence.
A Department was created under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. This body is responsible for the material and technical equipment of courts of general jurisdiction. He oversees the judicial funding mechanism.
Conversions to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR
Until 2002, the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR of 1960 continued to operate on the territory of the Russian Federation. In pursuance of the proposals of the Concept of Judicial Reform of 1991, various amendments were made to the Code of Criminal Procedure. In 1992, a law was issued that allowed a lawyer to be admitted to a suspect from the beginning of the detention. In addition, the law provided for the right of a person in custody to appeal a preventive measure in court. On July 16, 1993, the Law on Jury trials appeared. Then the CPC was replenished with new grounds for terminating the criminal case: as a result of active repentance and reconciliation with the victim.
The decisions of the Constitutional Court had a great influence on changing the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. Now the participants in the process have the right to appeal against the court’s decision to refuse to initiate proceedings, to extend the investigation, search, seize the property, etc. In a decision of April 20, 1999, the Court prohibited the courts, on their own initiative, from returning cases for further investigation in connection with with its incompleteness or for a more serious charge.
Legislative changes
One of the most important areas of judicial reform was the softening of the criminal procedure law. The task is to ensure the observance of the rights of citizens participating in production. The creators of the Concept proposed the following legislative improvements:
- separation of forms of criminal proceedings;
- judicial control over decisions taken at the stages of the preliminary investigation;
- introduction of the principle of competitiveness at all stages of production;
- stricter requirements for admissibility of evidence;
- empowering parties to gather evidence.
All these ideas appeared in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, which entered into force on July 1, 2002. The new law was developed with the desire to introduce an adversarial criminal process in Russia. In the modern CPC there is no principle of objective truth inherent in the Soviet criminal process. The Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation separates the court from the parties to the prosecution and the defense, recognizing it as an independent participant in the proceedings. The principle of adversarialism is proclaimed, including at the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings.
Operational judicial control
According to the authors of the 1991 Concept, the court should stand at the head of the law enforcement system. Judicial control over the actions of officials conducting criminal prosecutions should guarantee the fulfillment of human rights and freedoms. It is the court that is called upon to protect citizens from arbitrariness on the part of investigative bodies connected with the use of coercive measures.
The Criminal Code of the RSFSR provided for prosecutorial oversight of the legality of actions and acts of investigative bodies. The authors of the Concept criticize this approach, since the prosecutor and the investigating authorities are connected by a common task - the implementation of criminal prosecution. Consequently, prosecutorial supervision cannot adequately ensure compliance with the constitutional rights of citizens in criminal proceedings.
The following forms of control by the court appeared in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation:
- the legality of the election of coercive measures (house arrest, detention, etc.);
- authorization of certain investigative actions (search, inspection of the home, recording telephone conversations, etc.);
- the legality and validity of decisions affecting constitutional human rights (consideration of complaints against the actions of investigative bodies).
Consequences of the Reform
The criminal procedure policy of the Russian Federation is still taking shape under the influence of the 1991 judicial reform. Some ideas proposed by the authors of the Concept were implemented, and some did not take root.
- In 1993, a jury was reinstated as a form of criminal justice.
- Appeal stage appeared.
- Judicial review has developed at the preliminary investigation stage. According to Article 29 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court authorizes decisions on the selection of preventive measures, prolonging the time of detention in custody, as well as certain investigative actions.
The legislator did not accept the idea of separation of supervision over the preliminary investigation and acting as a public prosecutor in court. As practice shows, the effectiveness of an investigation at all its stages is connected with the continuity of its implementation.
Control by the courts of general jurisdiction exercised over the investigating authorities was not as effective as it was conceived by the creators of the Concept. The court will most likely satisfy the investigator's request for detention. However, the constitutional review turned out to be effective , thanks to which the inconsistencies of the CPC norms are corrected to the Basic Law of the Russian Federation.
Russian criminal trial
Although the creators of the 1991 Concept of Judicial Reform conceived the transition from an investigative criminal process to an adversarial process, this was not fully implemented. Today, the criminal process in Russia is mixed. Allocation of the full-fledged stage of pre-trial proceedings inherent in the continental criminal process has been preserved. In addition, in Russia there are the following institutions that are not characteristic of the adversarial process:
- involvement as an accused;
- prosecutorial supervision of the investigator and interrogator;
- appeal of the verdict and appeal stage;
- consideration of criminal cases by a professional court.
Many provisions of the Soviet Code of Criminal Procedure were borrowed by modern criminal procedure law. The following institutions have undergone few changes: the stage of the initiation of proceedings, the delimitation of preliminary investigation and inquiry, evidence in criminal proceedings. The first 10 years of the CPC of the Russian Federation preserved Soviet cassation and supervision, the stage of appeal proceedings did not appear immediately.
The development of the modern criminal process
On the other hand, the Russian criminal process has acquired some competitive features. The principle of material truth in the case has disappeared from the procedural law. Attempts have been made to extend competition to the pre-trial stage of production. Thus, the investigator, the interrogating officer and the prosecutor are recognized by the prosecution. The procedural activity of the court was also reduced and its authority to collect evidence in the case was limited. It became possible to review cases in an abbreviated manner if the person agrees with the charge against him.
One can say about the Concept of judicial reform in the RSFSR that it set the direction for the development of the criminal process. The main idea is to create a fair, speedy and affordable court that meets international standards. Reform is a slow process, so the improvement of the domestic judicial system continues to this day.