Legislative regulation of the list of expenses related to procedural costs in Criminal proceedings

Abstract

The use of the institute of procedural costs is one of the tools that ensure the participation in criminal proceedings of both its participants and other persons involved in criminal proceedings. This determines the importance of legislative regulation on the attribution of certain expenses of these persons to those that are subject to reimbursement by the state. At the same time, unreasonable restrictions should not be allowed in the reimbursement of those expenses that are really necessary for the performance of the procedural duties assigned to these persons. Methodologically, the approach to the regulation of the list of procedural costs can be presented in two types: exhaustive or open, assuming an expansive interpretation. Currently, the legislator has established an open list of costs, indicating in paragraph 9 of Part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation “other expenses incurred during the criminal proceedings”. A comparative historical analysis of approaches to the regulation of types of costs used at different times in the Russian criminal process, as well as a study of the attitude to the currently established open list of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation from the doctrine and law enforcement allowed us to conclude that the existing approach is ineffective and suggest in the future a transition to the establishment of a list of specific procedural costs, which will make the practice more stable and predictable.

References

1. Belkin, A.R. (2017). The Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation: canceled can’t it be correct? (vol. 2). Moscow (in Russ.).
2. Gryazeva, N.V. (2011). Problematic issues of determining the legal nature and procedural procedure for the reimbursement of funds spent on the search for persons who escaped from correctional institutions. Penal enforcement law, 2, pp. 27–29 (in Russ.).
3. Zheltobryukhov, S.P. (2012). Temporary suspension of a suspect (accused) from his position. Russian justice, 9, pp. 35–39 (in Russ.).
4. Ishchenko, E.P. (2007). Who will protect the victim? Criminal proceedings, 3, pp. 2–10 (in Russ.).
5. Kamchatov, K.V. (2007). Problematic issues of the realization of the rights of the victim of a crime at the pre-trial stages of the criminal process of the Russian Federation. Law and politics, 5, pp. 132–140 (in Russ.).
6. Klyukova, M.E. and Bikmiev, R.G. (2013). On the issue of the source of reimbursement of procedural costs in the form of a monthly state allowance for temporary removal from office. Bulletin of Economics, Law and Sociology, 1, pp. 152–155 (in Russ.).
7. Kashtanova, N.S. (2017). On some issues of appointment and payment of a monthly state allowance to a temporarily suspended suspect (accused, defendant) in the criminal proceedings of Russia and Kazakhstan: legislative and law enforcement aspects. Bulletin of the Omsk Law Academy, vol. 14, 3, pp. 117–123 (in Russ.).
8. Kashtanova, N.S. (2017). On the issue of the specifics of recovery (compensation) of procedural costs in a criminal case in the form of a monthly state allowance paid to a suspect (accused) temporarily removed from office (paragraph 8, Part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). Russian judge, 4, pp. 33–37 (in Russ.).
9. Landau, I.L. (2013). Implementation of the constitutional principle of providing victims with access to justice. In K. B., Kalinovskij and T.V., Sokolov (Eds.). The relationship between constitutional and criminal proceedings (pp. 192–199). St. Petersburg (in Russ.).
10. Maslov, V. (2008). Procedural rights of victims. Legality, 9, pp. 13–15. (in Russ.).
11. Pavlik, M.Y. and Shepeleva, O.R. (2014). Issues of realization of the rights of the victim in criminal proceedings. Leningrad Law Journal, 1, pp. 226–231 (in Russ.).
12. Perekrestov, V.N., Ismailova, O.S. and Gusejnova, N.N. (2017). Other procedural costs in criminal proceedings. New science: Experience, traditions, innovations, 1–3(123), pp. 222–224 (in Russ.).
13. Sopneva, E.V. and Procenko, A.A. (2020). The investigator’s view on some issues of payments to a lawyer involved in a criminal case by appointment. Lawyer-Jurist, 2 (93), pp. 104–109 (in Russ.).
14. Tabakov, S.A. (2014). Application of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on procedural costs in the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Legislation and practice, 1, pp. 49–52. (in Russ.).
15. Gernet, M.N. (Ed.). (1916). The Statute of Criminal Proceedings. Systematic commentary. Moscow (in Russ.).
16. Fojnickij, I.Y. (1910). Course of criminal proceedings. (vol. 2). St. Petersburg (in Russ.).
17. Fomichev, O.A. (2019). Ensuring compensation of procedural costs as one of the tasks of the preliminary investigation bodies. In S. Y., Biryukov and D.V., Kajrgaliev (Eds.). Law and order in Russia: problems of improvement. (pp. 231–234). Volgograd (in Russ.).
18. Shubin, V.V. (1973). Judicial practice in collecting court costs in criminal cases. Soviet justice, 22, pp. 3–4 (in Russ.).