The Institution of Recusal of Judges in Civil Proceedings: Historical Aspect

Abstract

Introduction. This article is devoted to the study of the history of the development of the institution of recusal in civil proceedings. A number of separate norms of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are devoted to the institution of recusal of a judge in civil proceedings. A correct understanding of these norms is possible with the help of their historical analysis. The study of the historical aspect of the institution of recusal of a judge in civil proceedings can be useful in developing new legislative initiatives on this issue, and can also contribute to the removal of controversial issues in this area. Theoretical Basis. Methods. A number of historical periods in the development of judicial recusal were studied: the period from the Council Code of 1649 in Russia to the Code of Civil Laws of 1832 in Russia, the period of the Charter of Civil Proceedings of 1864, the Soviet period, and the modern period. Special attention is paid to the Russian pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods of development of the institution of judicial recusal in civil proceedings. This approach is due to the fact that in these periods of development of the Institute, the rules of withdrawal are most similar to the modern rules of withdrawal. The study uses the historical method, as well as the method of analysis and comparison. Results. The results of the study are: familiarise the reader with the history of recusal in civil proceedings; a comparative analysis of the development of the Institute in different periods of history, the formation on this basis conclusions about the Genesis of the withdrawal; identify trends in the development of the institution of disqualification and the proposals on the prospects of its reforming. Discussion and Conclusion. The modern recusal is a receiver of the Soviet recusal, so it has all the main distinctive features of the Soviet recusal indicated in this article. Recent changes of the recusal can be grouped as follows. First, these are changes related to the judicial reform. These changes are detailed in the article. Secondly, the change of the recusal, which is a consequence of allowing the recognition of the judge as suspicious at any time of the trial, as well as the lack of responsibility for unscrupulous applicants of the recusal. The first group of changes is the result of judicial reform in general. The second change is an attempt by the modern legislator to correct an error in the rules of Soviet recusal, in which the recusal of a suspicious judge was allowed without a time limit.