РЕАЛИЗАЦИЯ ПРАВА ГРАЖДАН НА УЧАСТИЕ В ОТПРАВЛЕНИИ ПРАВОСУДИЯ: ВОЗМОЖНЫЕ ПУТИ РЕФОРМИРОВАНИЯ В УГОЛОВНОМ ПРОЦЕССЕ

Abstract

The Constitution of the Russian Federation considers the jury as a form of citizens’ participation in the administration of justice, though it was not widely accepted for a long time. Recreated in the early 1990s, the jury trial suffered from limited powers. Subsequently, the range of criminal cases within its jurisdiction became even more limited. The jury expanded its jurisdiction when introduced to district courts in June 1, 2018. On the one hand, the expanded jurisdiction of the jury improves activities of the court and other participants in the criminal process. On the other hand, the changes did not result in the effective exercise of the right of citizens to participate in the administration of justice, which suggests the necessity of the jury’s further expansion. Since it is difficult not to ensure the participation of the jury in minor and medium gravity cases, the increase in the number of cases brought before a jury should occur at the expense of certain types of grave and especially grave crimes. The expansion of the jury competence on grave and especially grave crimes will not be a final solution to the problem of involving citizens in the administration of justice. In contrast to Soviet Russia, where popular representatives (lay judges) exercised control over the judges in all criminal cases at first instance, today, in most cases, justice is administered by judges alone. The people’s court has advantages over the sole consideration of the case, as it ensures open justice, increases the responsibility of professional participants in the process, and raises the prestige of performing judicial functions. It is possible to return lay judges to district courts for non-grave and medium-grave cases implying custodial punishment. Thus, the effective implementation of the constitutional right of citizens to participate in the administration of justice can be achieved through various forms. Expanding the jury’s competence at the expense of certain types of grave and especially grave crimes, the introduction of lay judges for non-grave and medium-grave crimes implying custodial punishment will promote a broader participation of citizens in the administration of justice.