Courts in the general jurisdiction system. Judicial power and judicial system of the Russian Federation

THE TEXTS OF THE BOOKS BELONG TO THEIR AUTHORS AND ARE PLACED FOR REFERENCE

§ 2. The concept of “link of the judicial system” and “court authority”. Their characteristics .

§ 2. The concept of “link of the judicial system” and “court authority”. Their characteristics

The system of courts of general jurisdiction is based on the division of courts into units in accordance with the administrative-territorial structure of our state. There is a three-tier system for dividing these vessels.

The concept of “link of the judicial system” is associated with the range of powers that are assigned to certain judicial bodies. The courts that make up a certain link in the system have the same subject competence, the same functions, and in most cases operate within territorial units that are equal to each other in administrative status.

Courts operating in districts or cities (not having a district division), districts in a city, as well as interdistrict (district) courts have the same position and constitute the first link, i.e. are the main link in the system of courts of general jurisdiction.

This recognition of the special role of these courts, as the main link, follows from the fact that:

They constitute the vast majority of the judiciary;

They are the lower levels, closest to the population;

In administering justice, they consider a significant number of civil and criminal cases received by these courts.

The first link also includes the interregional court.

The second link of the judicial system is Supreme Court Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional, Kiev and Sevastopol city courts. These courts have the same functions and occupy the same position in the court system as the second link in relation to the first link.

The Supreme Court acts as the third link, being the highest judicial body of the system of courts of general jurisdiction, and supervises the judicial activities of the courts of the first and second links.

Thus, the district (city), interdistrict (district) court, interregional court is the first link; Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts are the second link; the third is the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

The difference in the activities of courts at various levels is also determined by whether they administer justice as courts of first instance, cassation or supervisory instances. The concept of “court” is associated with the nature of the specific activities of the court in the administration of justice. In contrast to the organizational structure of the court system, a separate element of which is the “judicial link,” the relationship of courts in the field of their activities is determined by the use of the concept of “court authority,” which denotes an independent stage through which a specific case passes or can pass in various courts. Each of these stages is distinguished by the uniqueness of the tasks being solved and its characteristic features of legal proceedings.

There are three courts:

I. Courts having delineated powers are called courts of first instance. They consider civil and criminal cases on their merits, deciding:

solutions for civil cases, sentences in criminal cases, determinations - in any of these proceedings.

In the system of courts of general jurisdiction, all courts have jurisdiction of the first instance - from the district to the Supreme Court of Ukraine. They carry out judicial proceedings in an oral and direct manner, examine evidence, listen to participants in the process, and conduct other procedural actions. In a criminal case, they establish the guilt or innocence of the defendant, bring the perpetrator to criminal responsibility, and impose criminal punishment. In civil cases - claims are satisfied or denied, the presence or absence of legal facts is recognized.

In order to ensure the stability of judicial acts, the court that made a decision or sentence cannot itself either change or cancel it.

Decisions and sentences of most courts do not enter into force within the period established by law. legal force and can be appealed in cassation by the defendant, his defense attorney and legal representative, the victim and his representative, a civil plaintiff, a civil defendant, or protested by a prosecutor in a court of second instance. If a cassation appeal or protest is filed, regardless of its validity, the case is considered in the court of second instance.

II. The court of cassation (second) instance verifies the legality and validity of decisions, sentences and rulings of the courts of first instance before they enter into legal force.

So, for a district (city) court, the court of second instance is the regional and equivalent court, and for the regional - the Supreme Court of Ukraine. Cassation proceedings of a case are possible only on the basis of a cassation appeal or cassation protest. Court cassation instance considers the case in a composition of three permanent judges (one of them is the presiding judge). If, during the cassation hearing of the case, it is established that the conclusions of the court of first instance, set out in the verdict or decision, do not correspond to the factual circumstances of the case, or were made in violation of the law, the court of second instance cancels the verdict or decision and sends the case for a new trial in the same or another court. but the appropriate court.

The court of second instance, based on the results of the cassation hearing of the case, issues a ruling that comes into force immediately and is not subject to appeal or appeal in cassation. It can be protested only by way of supervision.

The cassation court does not decide the case on the merits and in this sense cannot replace the court of first instance. When canceling or changing a sentence (decision) if there are grounds for doing so, the cassation instance indicates in the ruling the errors made by the lower court and provides arguments to justify its decision. In addition, if the verdict (decision) is overturned, without prejudging the outcome of the secondary consideration of the case, it makes recommendations on its proper new trial, for example, on the need to bring in new evidence, check the facts and circumstances. The instructions of the court of second instance are binding on the lower court when re-examining the case within the limits established by law.

A complaint and cassation protest against the verdict of the court of first instance can be filed within 7 days from the date of announcement of the verdict.

Cassation private complaints and presentations in civil cases are filed within 10 days from the date of proclamation of the decision.

Sentences and decisions of district (city), interdistrict (circuit), interregional courts can be appealed and protests can be filed against them in cassation - to the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional. Kiev and Sevastopol city courts, and sentences and decisions of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts can be appealed and protests can be filed against them in cassation - to the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

Cassation appeals and protests against sentences, decisions and rulings of district (city) inter-district (circuit), interregional courts are considered by the judicial panels for criminal and civil cases of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional, Kiev and Sevastopol city courts, and against sentences, decisions and rulings The Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional, Kiev and Sevastopol city courts - judicial panels for criminal and civil cases, military panels of the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

But judicial acts that have entered into legal force may turn out to be illegal and unfounded. To prevent their action, a special procedure for reviewing court cases by way of supervision has been established.

III. The supervisory court checks the legality and validity of decisions, sentences, rulings and rulings of the courts of the first, cassation and lower supervisory instances, doing this in two procedural forms:

by way of judicial supervision;

resumption of criminal cases and review of civil cases based on newly discovered circumstances.

Revision by way of supervision of a court verdict, ruling and resolution that has entered into legal force is allowed only upon the protest of the prosecutor, the chairman of the court and their deputies to whom this right is granted by law.

Protests have the right to be brought by:

1. The Chairman of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, their deputies - on sentences, rulings and decisions of any court operating on the territory of Ukraine, with the exception of decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court;

2. The chairman of the regional, the chairman of the Kiev and Sevastopol city courts and the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and their deputies, the prosecutor of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the regional prosecutor, prosecutors of the cities of Kiev and Sevastopol, prosecutors equivalent to them and their deputies - for sentences, rulings and decisions of district (city), interdistrict (district), interregional courts and cassation rulings of the regional judicial panels. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts.

Review by way of supervision of a conviction, ruling and court decision in connection with the need to apply the law on a more serious crime, for the leniency of punishment or for other reasons entailing a worsening of the situation of the convicted person is allowed only within a year after they enter into legal force.

The Chairman of the Supreme Court, the Prosecutor General and their deputies have the right to suspend, until the case is resolved by way of supervision, the execution of the protested verdict, ruling or decision of any court of Ukraine, except for the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court.

Chairman of the Supreme Court, Prosecutor General, their deputies, Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional. Kiev and Sevastopol city courts, the prosecutor of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the regional prosecutor, the cities of Kiev and Sevastopol and prosecutors equivalent to them, if there are sufficient grounds indicating a violation of the law, have the right, simultaneously with the request of a criminal case, to suspend the execution of the sentence, ruling or court order until they are protested , but for a period of no more than three months or until the protest is considered in court.

Cases under supervision are considered:

1. Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts - upon protests of the Chairman of the Supreme Court, the Prosecutor General and their deputies, the Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the regional one. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts and their deputies, the prosecutor of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the region, the cities of Kiev and Sevastopol and their deputies - on sentences, decisions and rulings of district (city), inter-district (circuit), inter-regional courts, on judges' decisions and cassation rulings of the Supreme Courts of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional, Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts;

2. The Judicial Collegium for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of Ukraine - upon protests of the Chairman of the Supreme Court, the Prosecutor General, and their deputies - against sentences and rulings of district (city) courts, interdistrict (district), regional courts. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts, as well as decisions of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional ones. Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts and decisions of judges;

3. Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine - on protests of the Chairman of the Supreme Court, the Prosecutor General, their deputies - on the verdicts and rulings of the judicial panel on criminal cases of the Supreme Court and on the decisions of judges of the same court.

If the majority of members of the presidium of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional took part in the consideration of the case in the court of first instance or in cassation proceedings. Kiev and Sevastopol city courts, the chairman of this court or the prosecutor, if there are grounds for filing a protest, forward the case with a presentation to the Chairman of the Supreme Court or the Prosecutor General, respectively, to resolve the issue of bringing a protest in the manner of supervision to the Supreme Court In cases where a protest in such a case is brought The case is considered by the Prosecutor General, the Chairman of the Supreme Court or their deputies in the manner of supervision by the judicial panel for criminal cases of the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

A protest by way of supervision in the judicial collegium of the Supreme Court is considered with the participation of a prosecutor.

When considering a case under supervision by the Plenum of the Supreme Court, the participation of the Prosecutor General or his deputy is mandatory.

The case, by way of supervision, is considered by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional, Kiev and Sevastopol city courts no later than twenty days, and by the judicial panel for criminal cases of the Supreme Court - no later than one month from the date of receipt of the case with a protest.

IN necessary cases The convicted person, the acquitted person, their defense attorneys, legal representatives, the victim and his representative, the civil plaintiff, the civil defendant and their representatives may be invited to the sessions of the court considering the case by way of supervision to give explanations. These persons are provided with the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the protest.

The consideration of the case begins with the judge's report. In the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regional. The case and protest of the Kyiv and Sevastopol city courts are reported by a member of the presidium or a member of the court who has not previously taken part in the consideration of this case. In the judicial collegium and in the Plenum of the Supreme Court, the case with protest is reported by the chairman, his deputy or a member of the Supreme Court.

After the judge’s report, the persons involved in the case give explanations, then the prosecutor supports the protest brought by him or expresses his opinion on the case being considered based on the protest of the chairman of the court or his deputy.

The Plenum of the Supreme Court and the Presidium make decisions, and judicial panel Supreme Court - determination.

So, the judicial system and the judicial system are not the same thing. When delimiting the links of the system of courts of general jurisdiction, the administrative-territorial location of the courts and the scope of their functions are taken into account - courts of the same link, located within the same administrative-territorial units, have the same competence. When delimiting the courts, the determining factors are:

do they administer justice: by judicial trial with a decision court decisions, sentences and determinations based on direct examination of evidence;

or by checking the legality and validity of judicial acts in cassation or supervisory procedures.

Thus, the judicial authority should be understood as a judicial institution authorized to hear a case on the merits (court of first instance) or to verify the legality and validity of a sentence or decision that has not entered into legal force (court of cassation), or to verify the legality and validity a sentence, decision, determination that has entered into legal force (supervisory authority).

From the point of view of organizational relations, the court system is usually divided into links. Under part of the judicial system refers to courts endowed with equal competence, including all the variety of functions of the judiciary. From these positions, the entire system of courts can be divided into three links: basic, secondary and higher (Fig. 2.1).

In relation to territorial (conditional name) courts of general jurisdiction, the division will be as follows:

the main link is district courts;

middle level - supreme courts of republics, regional courts, regional courts, courts of federal cities, courts of the autonomous region and autonomous districts;

3) the highest level - the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Military courts include the following levels:

the main link is the garrison military courts;

middle link - district (naval) military courts;

the highest level is the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation).

Arbitration court units:

the main link is the arbitration courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

middle level - arbitration courts of appeal and district arbitration courts;

the highest level is the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation.

Rice. 2.1. Judicial system of the Russian Federation

If a link shows the place of a court in the judicial system in connection with its activities in a certain territory, then functional connections are determined by the concept of instance. By the court a court or its structural unit is considered to perform one or another function of justice based on the purposes of the trial of the case (making a decision on the merits, checking the legality of previously made decisions). There are considerations of cases at first instance, cassation or appeal proceedings and review of cases by way of supervision.

Justice at first instance ~ This is a consideration of the case on the merits with the aim of convicting or acquitting the defendant - in a criminal case or satisfying or refusing a claim - in civil and arbitration cases. Cases of first instance are heard by all courts. Most criminal and civil cases are considered at first instance by district courts, and arbitration cases - arbitration courts subjects of the Russian Federation. The most complex cases are considered in the first instance by the courts of the second level, and a very small number of cases are considered in the first instance by the highest level of the judicial system.

Cassation proceedings carried out, as a rule, in second-tier courts. Verification of sentences and decisions of the court of first instance is carried out according to cassation appeal or the cassation presentation of the prosecutor. Based on the results of the review of the case in the cassation instance, the court issues a ruling, which assesses the legality and validity of the sentence or decision of the first instance court and makes one of two decisions: to leave the sentence (decision) in force or to cancel it and send the case for a new trial at the same time. or another court corresponding to it.

The second authority may be appellate authority(in the district court in cases considered by magistrates, as well as in the system of arbitration courts). The peculiarity of the appellate instance is that, having overturned the decision of the court of first instance, the same court can simultaneously consider the case anew with a new decision or sentence.

Consideration of cases by way of supervision may take place after a previously passed sentence or decision has entered into legal force and has not been refuted in the usual (cassation) procedure. The exceptional (supervisory) procedure is aimed at eliminating previously committed violations or in connection with the emergence of newly discovered circumstances previously unknown to the court. Review of cases by way of supervision is carried out only on the initiative of a limited circle of persons expressly listed in the law; in structural divisions of mid-level courts or in high-level courts.

Further development of the judicial system, improving the quality of justice, improving judicial protection the rights and legitimate interests of citizens and legal entities are constantly in the field of view of government authorities.

By order of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 4, 2006 No. 081-r, the Concept for the development of the judicial system of Russia for 2007-2011 was approved. It is planned to improve procedural legislation; increasing the level of execution of judicial acts (currently - 52%); ensuring open justice; combating corruption within the judiciary; allocation of additional funds to provide judges with housing (2.7 billion rubles) and a number of other measures.

Provides for a variety of internal relationships, which are determined by organizational and functional connections. Organizational connections are regulated by the legislation on the judicial system, functional connections - by the legislation on legal proceedings.

From point of view organizational connections, the court system is usually divided into links. A unit of the judicial system refers to courts endowed with equal competence, which includes all the variety of functions of the judiciary. From these positions, the entire system of courts can be divided into three parts: basic, secondary and higher.

In relation to territorial courts of general jurisdiction:

the main link is district courts;
middle level - supreme courts of republics, regional, regional courts, courts of federal cities, courts of autonomous regions and autonomous districts;
the highest level is the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Military courts:

the main link is the garrison military courts;
middle level - district (naval) military courts;
the highest level is the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (Military Collegium of the Supreme Court).

the main link is the arbitration courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
middle level – district arbitration courts;
the highest level is the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation.

By the court a court or its structural unit is considered to perform one or another function of justice based on the purposes of the trial of the case.

Justice at first instance- this is a consideration of the case on the merits with the aim of convicting or acquitting the defendant in a criminal case and satisfying the claim or refusing it in civil and arbitration cases. Cases of first instance are heard by all courts. Most criminal and civil cases are considered in the first instance by district courts, and arbitration cases - by arbitration courts in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. The most complex cases are considered in the first instance by the courts of the second level, and a very small number of cases are considered in the first instance by the highest level of the judicial system.

Cassation proceedings carried out, as a rule, in second-tier courts. Verification of sentences and decisions of the court of first instance is carried out based on a cassation appeal or cassation protest by the prosecutor. Based on the results of the review of the case in the cassation instance, the court issues a ruling that assesses the legality and validity of the sentence or decision of the first instance court and makes one of two decisions: to leave the sentence (decision) in force or to cancel it and send the case for a new trial at the same time. or another court corresponding to it.

Court of Appeal has a peculiarity: having overturned the decision of the court of first instance, the same court can reconsider the case with a new decision or sentence.

Consideration of cases by way of supervision perhaps after a previously passed sentence or decision has entered into legal force and has not been refuted in the usual (cassation) procedure. The exceptional (supervisory) procedure is aimed at eliminating previously committed violations in connection with the emergence of newly discovered circumstances previously unknown to the court. Review of cases by way of supervision is carried out only upon the protest of a limited circle of persons expressly listed in the law, in structural divisions of mid-level courts or in high-level courts.

The unity of the judicial system provides for a variety of internal relations, which are determined by organizational and functional connections. Organizational ties are regulated by the legislation on the judicial system, while functional ties are regulated by the legislation on legal proceedings.

In relation to territorial courts of general jurisdiction:

– the main link is district courts;

– middle level – supreme courts of republics, regional, regional courts, courts of federal cities, courts of autonomous regions and autonomous districts;

– highest level – the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Military courts:

– the main link is the garrison military courts;

– middle level – district (naval) military courts;

– highest level – the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (Military Collegium of the Supreme Court).

Arbitration courts:

– the main link is the arbitration courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

– middle level – district arbitration courts;

– highest level – Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation. By the court a court or its structural unit is considered to perform one or another function of justice based on the purposes of the trial of the case.

Court of Appeal has a peculiarity: having overturned the decision of the court of first instance, the same court can reconsider the case with a new decision or sentence.