Criminal Proceedings Against Certain Categories of Persons: Russian and International Aspects

Abstract

The article examines the question of including criminal procedure guarantees for persons with a special status into Russian and international legislations. The author disagrees with the opinion of scholars that the very existence of Chapter 52 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation contradicts the constitutional principle of universal equality before the law and the courts. At the same time, a critical assessment is given to the absence of this principle in Russian criminal procedure legislation. The author compares the scope of people entitled to criminal procedure immunity with the legislation of other countries, primarily, the CIS countries, whose legal culture is most similar to that of Russia. It is noted that the legislators of foreign countries have a different approach to determining both the scope of such people and the limits of immunity established by law. Specifically, a positive assessment is given to the exception of guarantees against criminal prosecution to the judicial immunity in Kazakh and Polish legislations, and the limitation of functional immunity for the members of the US Congress to the period of Congressional sessions in the United States. It is concluded that different countries have different approaches to determining the scope of persons with a special procedural status: in some of them, functional immunity is seen as vital for special persons performing acts of state, while in others the institute of functional immunity is applied to a wide range of officials whose work is sometimes not connected with acts of state. Russian legislation is among the latter, as it contains an extensive list of persons immune from criminal prosecution. Nevertheless, according to the author, a special and more complex procedure for certain categories of persons enshrined in Russian criminal procedure legislation is objectively justified, and the legal basis for its validity is the priority of the principle of separation of powers and independence of the actions of persons representing them, over the principle of universal equality before the law.