ISSUES OF DIFFERENTIATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF PROCEDURAL AGREEMENTS IN JUDICIAL AND INVESTIGATIVE PRACTICE
Keywords:
procedural agreement, guilty plea, presentation of evidence, differentiation, appeal, subject of trial.Abstract
This article aims to analyze the problems of differentiation of procedural agreements in the practice of judicial investigation. A plea agreement is an agreement made between the prosecutor and the suspect, the accused, or the defendant at any stage of the criminal proceedings and in other cases provided by law. According to the author’s opinion, the essence of the procedural agreement is its dependence on the accused’s attitude towards his guilt, that is, a differential approach. Regardless of the plea agreement, the judge’s obligation to examine and evaluate the available evidence in the case is an important guarantee aimed at ensuring that innocent persons forced to enter into a plea agreement as a result of physical or mental coercion are not convicted. The article also explains and substantiates the need to clearly define the circumstances that must be determined in cases where a procedural agreement has been concluded. The article also explains and substantiates the need to clearly define the circumstances that must be determined in cases where a procedural agreement has been concluded. The article also analyzes the criteria for differentiating the forms of a procedural agreement. The author made a comparative analysis of the forms of a procedural agreement, such as a procedural agreement on the admission of guilt, a procedural agreement on reconciliation, an agreement on cooperation with the investigation. The problems of differentiation of procedural agreements in the practice of judicial investigation of foreign countries and various legal systems are investigated.
References
1. Toʻlaganova G. Z. Jinoyat-protsessual qonunchilikni yanada takomillashtirish imkoniyatlari [Possibilities for further improvement of criminal procedural legislation]. Tashkent, TSUL, 2014, 125 p.
2. Smirnov A.V., Kalinovskiy K.B. Ugolovnyy protsess [Criminal process]. St. Petersburg, 2009, p. 220.
3. Jinoyat-protsessual huquqi [Criminal procedural law]. General part. The team of authors. Tashkent, TSUL, 2017, 25 p.
4. Reformirovaniye ugolovnogo protsessa Respubliki Kazakhstan [Reforming the criminal process of the Republic of Kazakhstan]. Proceedings of the Legal Policy Research Center, Almaty, 2014, p. 7.
5. Gorskiy V.V., Gorskiy M.V. Dosudebnoye soglasheniye o sotrudnichestve s pozitsiy obespecheniya prav uchastnikov ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva (otdel’nyye problemy) [Pre-trial agreement on cooperation of positions to ensure the rights of participants in criminal proceedings (separate problems)]. Pre-trial agreement on cooperation (legal and forensic problems). Proceedings of scientific and practical conference. Voronezh, 2010, no. 6, p. 113.
6. Kostenko N.S. Dosudebnoye soglasheniye o sotrudnichestve v ugolovnom protsesse: pravovyye i organizatsionnyye voprosy zaklyucheniya i realizatsii [Pre-trial agreement on cooperation in criminal proceedings: legal and organizational issues of conclusion and implementation]. PhD thesis. Volgograd, 2013, pp. 110–111.
7. Golovinskiy M.M. Dosudebnoye soglasheniye o sotrudnichestve: normativno-pravovoye regulirovaniye i praktika primeneniya [Pre-trial agreement on cooperation: legal regulation and practice of application]. PhD thesis. Vladimir, 2011, p. 83.
8. Red’kin N.V. Osoby poryadok sudebnogo razbiratel’stva v sisteme ugolovnogo protsessa RF [Special order of trial in the system of criminal procedure of the Russian Federation]. PhD thesis. Krasnodar, 2007, p. 17
9. Bulygin A.V. Osnovaniya rassmotreniya ugolovnogo dela i osobennosti dokazyvaniya pri sudebnom razbiratel’stve v poryadke glavy 40 UPK RF [Grounds for the consideration of a criminal case and features of proof in court proceedings in the order of chapter 40 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation]. PhD thesis. Yekaterinburg, 2013, p. 143.
10. Yakimovich Yu.K. Ponyatiye, naznacheniye, differentsiatsiya ugolovnogo protsessa [The concept, purpose, differentiation of the criminal process]. Principles of criminal justice. Tomsk, 2015, p. 91.
11. Grankin K.B., Komarov V.B. Uproshchennaya protsedura sudebnogo razbiratel’stva nuzhdayetsya v sovershenstvovanii [The simplified procedure of the trial needs to be improved. Improving the activities of law enforcement agencies to combat crime in modern conditions]. Proceedingss of the international scientific-practical conference, Tyumen, 2010, iss. 7, part 2, p. 36.
12. Matkarimov Q.Q. Jinoyat ishlari yurituvini insonparvarlashtirish [Humanization of criminal proceedings]. Tashkent, Military-Technical Institute of the National Guard of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2020, p. 26.
13. Rahmonova S.M. Dastlabki sud muhokamasi ishni sudda koʻrish uchun tayinlash shakli sifatida [Preliminary hearing as a form of appointment for hearing the case in court]. Tashkent, MIA Academy, 2018, p. 55.
14. Zinnatov R.F. Realizatsiya sudebnoy vlasti na stadii podgotovki dela k sudebnomu zasedaniyu v sovremennom rossiyskom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Implementation of the judiciary at the stage of preparing a case for a court hearing in modern Russian criminal justice]. Izhevsk, 2006, p. 15.
15. Tisen O.N. Teoreticheskiye i prakticheskiye problemy instituta dosudebnogo soglasheniya i sotrudnichestva v rossiyskom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Theoretical and practical problems of the institute of pre-trial agreement and cooperation in Russian criminal proceedings]. Orenburg, 2017, p. 220.
