Свидетельский иммунитет в уголовном, гражданском, арбитражном и административном судопроизводстве: сравнительный анализ

Abstract

The author compares the normative consolidation of the institution of witness immunity in four procedural branches of law: criminal procedural, civil procedural, arbitration procedural and administrative procedural. The universal essence of this institution is determined for all types of legal proceedings under consideration and the need for a single regulation is assumed. The existence of a moral and ethical basis for exemption from witnessing is substantiated. The relationship is established between the development of this institution and the development of the branch of procedural law as a whole, the influence of the institution on the legal consciousness of citizens. Comparative analysis of industry regulation reveals a number of differences that are unjustified by industry specifics. These include a different list of close persons who are subject to family-related witness immunity. The rationale is given for the expediency of expanding the circle of close persons with witness immunity due to quasi-family and quasi-kinship relations. The disadvantage of criminal procedural witness immunity is the absence among its carriers of arbitration assessors, representatives who provide legal assistance and do not have a lawyer status, Commissioners for the Rights of the Child and Commissioners for the Protection of Entrepreneurs, mediators and judicial conciliators. The author argues on the basis of comparison with other procedural branches of the need to supplement the list of holders of «official» witness immunity in criminal proceedings. The existence of norms governing relations related to exemption from witnessing is stated in sources other than procedural codes. The conclusion is made about the need for a large-scale comparison and generalization of legal information related to witness immunities in order to develop a uniform normative consolidation for all industries.