Анализ подсудности судов первой инстанции Туркменистана

Abstract

The research is based on a comparative analysis of the competence of courts of first instance in Turk-menistan, Russia and some other countries. Interna-tional instruments include the requirements of com-pliance with the rules of jurisdiction which are car-ried out by the legislator of Turkmenistan. In au-thors’ opinion, in order to ease the burden on the courts of first instance, the term ‘misdemeanor’ should be enshrined in Article 11 of the Criminal Code of Turkmenistan as an independent form of punishment. Maximum punishment for it should imply up to one year of imprisonment. However, another option is possible. Misdemeanor Offense can be formulated as a separate article. For that pur-pose, the Criminal Procedure Code of Turkmenistan should provide for simplified (summary) proceed-ings, which do not appear in the current legislation of this country. The majority of the states were con-vinced of the usability and profitability of summary proceedings at the stages of inquiry, preliminary investigation and trial. Simplified and expedited op-tions save time needed to deal with more complex cases and reduce both court and pre-trial costs. To review the Turkmen legislation objectively, it is rea-sonable to compare it with the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Analyzing the is-sues of jurisdiction, i.e. competence, of courts on criminal cases on the territory of Russia, the authors examine Article 31 of the Russian Criminal Proce-dure Code. The rules of this article are of great im-portance. This article regulates the jurisdiction of the courts of first instance by enumerating the con-stituent elements of crimes in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. As a result, none of the constituent elements of crimes can remain un-reached and undistributed. However, if one reveals that the rules of jurisdiction have been violated, the verdict will be automatically canceled.