DOI: 10.7256/2454-0595.2018.7.27251

Abstract: In his research Bobrenev raises a question about challenging the prosecutor's caution against violation of law and bringing perpetrators to administrative responsibility for non-performance of the caution. The author of the research describes the balance between the single viewpoint of prosecutors that the prosecutor's caution does not create legal consequences for an individual who receives the caution, and practical realization of their position in law enforcement practice. The research has covered the provisions of the Federal Law on Public Prosecutor Office of the Russian Federation, legal acts of the General Prosecutor Office, judicial  decisions and academic literature on the matter. The methodological basis of the research has involved general research methods such as analysis, synthesis, induction, and formal logic as a special research method. The author of the article concludes that in accordance with scientific achievements and applicable legislation, the practice of challenging the prosecutor's caution and bringing perpetrators to administrative responsibility for non-performance of the caution should be changed. According to the author, in both cases a proceeding cannot be started and if started, such a proceeding should be stopped as it either violates the rights, freedoms and legal interests of an administrative complainant (Clause 3 of Part 1 of Article 128 and Part 3 of Article 194 of the Administrative Procedure Code) or there is no corpus delicti of an administrative offence (Clause 2 of Part 1 of Article 24.5 of the Administrative Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). 

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2017.10.24286

Abstract: This article is dedicated to the questions of organization of prosecutorial supervision of legality and justification of the decisions issued by the preliminary investigation bodies on refusals to institute a criminal case. The author reveals the procedural aspects of organization of prosecutorial[WU1]  oversight is this section of pre-trial proceedings, as well as the forms of interaction between the prosecutor’s office and bodies of inquiry and preliminary investigation. The subject of this research is the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, statistical data of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation, court rulings, as well as scientific literature on this matter. The author notes a significant amount of cancelled by a prosecutor decrees on the refusal to initiate a criminal case alongside the common cases associated with the repeated cancellation by a prosecutor of the decrees on refusal to initiate a criminal case adopted based on the materials of inspecting the same claim, which testifies to the low quality of the investigative work. Due to this, for the purpose of remedying the situation, the author provides specific suggestions of procedural and organizational legal character.  [WU1]

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2017.10.43107

Abstract: This article is dedicated to the questions of organization of prosecutorial supervision of legality and justification of the decisions issued by the preliminary investigation bodies on refusals to institute a criminal case. The author reveals the procedural aspects of organization of prosecutorial[WU1]  oversight is this section of pre-trial proceedings, as well as the forms of interaction between the prosecutor’s office and bodies of inquiry and preliminary investigation. The subject of this research is the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation, statistical data of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation, court rulings, as well as scientific literature on this matter. The author notes a significant amount of cancelled by a prosecutor decrees on the refusal to initiate a criminal case alongside the common cases associated with the repeated cancellation by a prosecutor of the decrees on refusal to initiate a criminal case adopted based on the materials of inspecting the same claim, which testifies to the low quality of the investigative work. Due to this, for the purpose of remedying the situation, the author provides specific suggestions of procedural and organizational legal character.  [WU1]