Введение: деятельность по расследованию и судебному рассмотрению и разрешению уголовных дел четко регулируется нормами уголовно-процессуального закона. Сущность и назначение уголовного судопроизводства, его наиболее важные черты и свойства, основные направления деятельности органов и должностных лиц, осуществляющих уголовно-процессуальную деятельность, а также исходные положения правового статуса иных участников процесса закреплены в его принципах. Вместе с тем уголовное судопроизводство не может не опираться на нормы нравственности, сформировавшиеся

The article examines the compromise model of building criminal proceedings in Russia on the example of special proceedings provided for in Chapters 40 and 40.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The dynamics of their application, emerging practical difficulties and incidents are monitored. The prospect of further use of special proceedings in criminal cases of serious and especially serious crimes is considered. Based on the analysis of specific criminal cases, it is proved that a significant reduction in the amount of punishment “guaranteed” by these proceedings is a legal fiction. Multiple negative features of their implementation are considered. The author substantiates the opinion that a special procedure for considering criminal cases for all serious and especially serious crimes, regardless of the forms of post-criminal behavior of the accused, is inadmissible.

Introduction: extremism in modern Russia is becoming more sophisticated and veiled, and is widely spread among young people, including through the Internet, and therefore it is of great importance to detect and stop it in a timely manner. The purpose of the work is to examine the existing theoretical structures on the issue of determining the scene of an extremist crime using the information and telecommunications networks and, accordingly, the territorial jurisdiction of criminal cases, as well as to study the practical side of the issue. Methods: the methodological framework for this research is a set of methods of scientific knowledge: dialectical, system, analysis, logical. Results: the author’s well-founded position is based on the current legislation, explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, current judicial practice, the position of scientists – processualists on determining the time and place of the crime in the global information network and the dependence of the criminal investigation on these factors. Conclusions: the study determined that extremist crimes committed using the information and telecommunications networks, including the Internet, are characterized by extraterritoriality and may be subject to the jurisdiction of several states. To correctly determine the jurisdiction of such criminal cases, it is necessary not to wait for the development of a single international act, but to follow the current provisions of Parts 3, 4 and 4.1 of Article 152 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

No abstract