Some Causes and Conditions of Manifest Excesses of Authority by Penitentiary Employees: Unlawful Acts Against Inmates

Mereckiy, Nikolay; Ishigeev, Vladimir S.

doi:10.17150/2500-4255.2019.13(5).772-781

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, violation of the packaging requirements makes it impossible in the future to use the relevant items as material evidence, the production of expert research, clearly reducing the effect of the proof process. [8] Fixation of the seized items must guarantee the impossibility of access to them without damaging the packaging, the invariability of information contained in them. For example, the seizure of a cell phone during a search should be accompanied by its packaging, allowing for its transportation and storage, excluding the possibility of mechanical damage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of information technology during investigative actions

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the fact that activities of authorized persons in during urgent investigative actions are episodic, the absence of responsibility for successful completion of investigation is unacceptable. In this case, law enforcement agencies are fulfilling a single socially important goal, and this should be realized by the relevant officials. Regarding the dynamics of accumulation of information during the investigation of a crime, it should be noted that during urgent investigative actions, an initial array of evidentiary information is formed, which is the result of transformation of initial background knowledge of relevant official regarding what happened under the influence of information obtained by investigative and operational means. The Criminal Procedure Law contains requirements both for the mechanical accumulation of a certain amount of evidence highlighting certain circumstances included in the subject of proof, and for their compliance with strictly established requirements. We are talking about the reliability, sufficiency, relevance and admissibility of evidence, which actually determine the possibility of ultimately using this information in deciding whether a person is guilty or innocent of committing a crime. The required amount of evidence that meets the requirements of reliability and sufficiency ensures the reliability of the evidence base in a criminal case. The evidence obtained should be assessed in the aggregate on the basis of the inner conviction of the person carrying out urgent investigative actions. Their use in the production of further investigation, in the course of court proceedings, depends on how procedurally correct evidence will be collected by the bodies of inquiry during the production of urgent investigative actions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of information technology during investigative actions

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Meskipun penetapan tersangka bukanlah upaya paksa tetapi kemungkinan terjadi kesewenang-wenangan yang dilakukan oleh kepolisian untuk mempermudah tugasnya bisa saja terjadi. Selain itu, tidak adanya mekanisme pengawasan dalam pelaksanaan tugas dari pihak kepolisian juga dapat menjadi salah satu alasan terjadinya hal tersebut (Shuruhnov, Mereckiy, & Ishigeev, 2019).…”

Section: Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor: 21/puu-xii/2014 Mengenai ...unclassified

Politik Hukum Praperadilan sebagai Lembaga Perlindungan Hak Tersangka Ditinjau dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 mengenai Penetapan Tersangka

Firmansyah¹,

Farid

2022

JPHK

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kewenangan melakukan pembatasan kebebasan pribadi dalam penetapan tersangka kasus pidana hanya dimiliki oleh Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. Hal ini menyebabkan tidak adanya mekanisme pengawasan bagi kepolisian ketika melakukan proses penangkapan, penahanan ataupun penggeledahan terhadap seorang tersangka. Ditetapkannya Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana berfungsi untuk mengatur kelembagaan praperadilan dalam melaksanakan upaya pengawasan horizontal terhadap tindakan pembatasan kebebasan pribadi yang bersifat memaksa. Lembaga praperadilan diciptakan sebagai upaya bagi tersangka untuk mengajukan keberatan terhadap proses penyelidikan dan penyidikan yang dilakukan oleh penyidik dari kepolisian. Adanya mekanisme praperadilan terebut diharapkan proses penegakan hukum tidak dilakukan sewenang-wenang oleh Kepolisian Republik Indonesia yang dapat mengakibatkan pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM). Penelitian hukum normatif dengan studi kepustakaan ini memiliki tujuan untuk mengelaborasi politik hukum preperadilan dalam perlindungan hak tersangka yang ditunjau dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 tentang sah atau tidaknya penetapan tersangka. Hasil penelitian ini menemukan bahwa masih terdapat kesewenangan dalam penetapan tersangka yang dilakukan oleh aparat Kepolisian. Selain itu, ditemukan bahwa masih banyak tersangka yang tidak mengetahui adanya upaya hukum yang dapat dilakukan ketika hak pribadinya dilanggar. Hal ini menyebabkan kurangnya pemahaman dan kesadaran hukum dari tersangka.

show abstract

“…However, in practice the potential of this seemingly effective measure cannot always be implemented by corrections officers of FSIN Russia. The problem of the current situation is multifaceted and controversial, but its essence, in our opinion, consists in the lack of awareness of the need to develop certain competencies in corrections officers that would allow them to act competently in a situation when convicts engage in illegal activity, in order to hold the latter criminally responsible [13].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

О Необходимости Формирования Уголовно-Процессуальных И Криминалистических Профессиональных Компетенций У Сотрудников Исправительных Учреждений ФСИН России

Шаталов¹,

Акчурин²

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper substantiates the idea that while performing law enforcement functions correctional institutions face the risks of illegal behavior on the part of those individuals who do not want to embark on the path of reformation. The most effective response to the facts of criminal acts committed by convicts is associated with the implementation of the principle of the inevitability of criminal punishment for such behavior. The speed of such a response is of paramount importance and depends on corrections officers themselves. The response can be effective only if officers of the Federal Penitentiary Service of Russia (FSIN Russia) use the full range of procedural and criminalistic tools at their disposal. Based on the analysis of the criminal procedure status of institutions, bodies and officials of FSIN Russia and the content of their functional responsibilities, we make an attempt to find out whether corrections officers need criminalistic knowledge. We identify the main areas in which corrections officers demand criminalistic knowledge. These include: law enforcement (for direct use in the implementation of criminal procedure powers, as well as for indirect use in the implementation of their main activities aimed at the execution of criminal penalties), education (for training personnel for penal institutions and bodies), and research (for further elaboration on the issues related to the investigation of prison offences).

show abstract

Some Causes and Conditions of Manifest Excesses of Authority by Penitentiary Employees: Unlawful Acts Against Inmates

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

The use of information technology during investigative actions

The use of information technology during investigative actions

Politik Hukum Praperadilan sebagai Lembaga Perlindungan Hak Tersangka Ditinjau dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 mengenai Penetapan Tersangka

О Необходимости Формирования Уголовно-Процессуальных И Криминалистических Профессиональных Компетенций У Сотрудников Исправительных Учреждений ФСИН России

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About