Инструментом обеспечения права на законный суд является институт подсудности, который должен содержать правила, позволяющие участникам уголовного процесса избежать правовой неопределенности в вопросе выбора суда, который правомочен разрешать конкретный спор, возникший в рамках уголовно-процессуальных отношений. На основе анализа норм закона, разъяснений Пленума ВС РФ и правоприменительной практики формулируется вывод, что вопросы подсудности рассмотрения жалоб лиц, отстаивающих в уголовном процессе свой частный интерес, на решения, вынесенные в ходе досудебного производства, не нашли комплексного и последовательного урегулирования в действующем уголовно-процессуальном законе, что ставит под угрозу возможность реализации права на судебную защиту в части обеспечения доступа к правосудию на досудебном этапе и рассмотрения дела законным судом, а также соблюдение таких важных конституционных принципов, как равенство прав граждан, справедливость, правовая определенность. В целях устранения выявленной и исследованной законодательной неопределенности и обеспечения доступности правосудия на досудебном этапе при обжаловании участниками, отстаивающими в процессе частные интересы, решений, вынесенных на досудебном производстве, авторами сформулированы предложения по внесению изменений в УПК РФ. Based on the analysis of the norms of the law, explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and law enforcement practice, the conclusion is formulated that the issues of jurisdiction of complaints of persons defending their private interests in criminal proceedings against decisions made during pre-trial proceedings have not found a comprehensive and consistent settlement in the current criminal procedure law, which jeopardizes the possibility of realization of the right to judicial protection in terms of ensuring access to justice at the pre-trial stage and consideration of the case by a lawful court, as well as compliance with such important constitutional principles as equality of citizens' rights, justice, legal certainty. In order to eliminate the identified and investigated legislative uncertainty and ensure the availability of justice at the pre-trial stage when appealing by participants defending private interests in the process of decisions made in pre-trial proceedings, the authors formulated proposals for amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Статья подготовлена в рамках проекта РГНФ № 16-03-00413 «Злоупотребление правом в уголовном процессе: системные и несистемные проявления, их предотвращение и пересечение». Анализируется проект изменений в Постановлении Пленума Верховного Суда РФ «О применении норм уголовнопроцессуального кодекса Российской Федерации, регулирующих производство в суде апелляционной инстанции». Ключевые слова: апелляционное производство; право на судебную защиту; злоупотребление правом; Постановление Пленума Верховного Суда РФ.

No abstract

No abstract

Article 48 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation guarantees everyone the right to a qualified legal assistance, including a free one. There is an imbalance in the domestic criminal proceedings in terms of establishing the guarantees to receive a qualified legal assistance by those participants who protect private interests (suspects, accused persons, victims). Based on the analysis of legislation, judicial practice, and scientific literature, the authors have identified the main manifestations of this imbalance. These manifestations include, in particular, the absence of requirements for the qualification of a person providing qualified legal assistance as a representative of the victim, as well as the absence of the victim's right to have a representative "by appointment" (except for the case provided for in Part 2.1б, Article 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). Thus, under Article 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the victim's representatives may be lawyers, close relatives or other persons whose admission is requested by the victim. The Criminal Procedure Code does not contain any requirements for the professional or personal qualities of "other persons", which does not make it possible to fully ensure that victims receive qualified legal assistance, which, as a result, does not allow us to talk about the full possibility of protecting their private interests. In this regard, the authors formulated proposals to establish requirements for the qualification of persons who are not lawyers who can be admitted to take part in the case as a representative of the victim. In particular, it is proposed to enshrine in the Code of Criminal Procedure that the representative of the victim may be lawyers and other persons providing legal assistance who have a higher legal education or an academic degree in a legal specialty by analogy with the requirements for a representative established in Part 3, Article 59 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The possibility of recovering the costs of paying for the services of a representative as legal costs under Articles 131 and 132 of the Code of Criminal Procedure currently compensates the victim's lack of the right to receive a free qualified legal assistance. However, such a procedure does not solve the problem of ensuring the participation of the victim's representative where the latter does not have the financial means to pay for his services, and also in most cases does not allow compensating fully the costs incurred by the victim, as evidenced by judicial practice. In this regard, the authors formulated proposals to amend Article 45 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and to enshrine in legislation the obligation of officials, the court, at the request of the victim, his legal representative, to ensure the participation of a lawyer as his representative, including at the expense of the federal budget. The authors declare no conflicts of interests.