Rehabilitation in criminal procedure: a critical analysis

Formulation of the problem. The provisions of Chapter 18 “Rehabilitation” of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are not always consistent with other provisions of the criminal procedure laws. The authors believe that stating (in clause 3, Art. 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) a termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) under clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation as the grounds for rehabilitation is conflicting. If such grounds as the absence of a criminal act (clause 1, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), the absence of the elements of a criminal offence (clause 2, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation), non-involvement of the suspect or accused in committing a crime (clause 1, Part 1, Art. 27 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) are recognized as the grounds for rehabilitation beyond doubt, the situation when the termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) specified in clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is stated as the grounds for rehabilitation looks different. Rehabilitation in criminal proceedings implies the restoration of the rights and freedoms of a person who has been unlawfully or unreasonably subjected to criminal prosecution, as well as compensation for harm caused to this person (clause 34, Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). Refusal to prosecute under the provisions of clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not mean the person’s innocence, nor that a person did not commit the alleged offence. The advisability of the rehabilitation of a person whose criminal prosecution was terminated with reference to clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation requires critical analysis. The purpose of the study is to analyze the grounds for refusing to initiate a criminal case or terminating a criminal case set forth in clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation: the absence of the court’s findings regarding the presence of the evidence of a crime in the actions of one of the persons specified in clauses 2 and 2.1, Part One, Art. 448 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, or the lack of consent of the Federation Council, the State Duma, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, or the qualification board of judges (respectively) to initiate a criminal case or to charge one of the persons specified in clauses 1 and 3 - 5, Part One, Art. 448 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, as well as to challenge recognizing these grounds as the grounds for rehabilitation. Objectives: 1) to identify legislative contradictions in recognizing the right for rehabilitation in connection with the termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) pursuant to clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; 2) to substantiate the exclusion of the termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) pursuant to clause 6, Part 1, Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation from the grounds for rehabilitation. Methods. The grounds for terminating a criminal case (criminal prosecution) have been the subject of multiple research papers. However, to the extent that the legal phenomenon under examination is taken exclusively in the context of the current laws and the practice of the application thereof, theoretical constructions, as a rule, are limited to scant comments illustrated with examples from judicial and investigative practice. The authors believe that this is not sufficient, since the effectiveness of certain legal institutions should be assessed based on the dynamics of their legal impact. Brief conclusions. The authors substantiate the need to exclude the grounds for terminating a criminal case (criminal prosecution) provided for in clause 6 of Part 1 of Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, from among the rehabilitating grounds entailing the right to compensation for harm caused in connection with illegal or unjustified criminal prosecution.