volume vii issue 6(20) fall 2016 by cristiana by made...volume vii, issue 6(20), fall 2016 1247...

Volume VII, Issue 6(20), Fall 2016

‘

1243

/

‘

Quarterly Volume VII Issue 6(20) Fall 2016 ISSN: 2068-696X Journal’s DOI: https://doi.org/10.14505/jarle

J

AS

ER

S

Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics


1244

Contents:

1 To a Question about the Criteria and Parameters of the Effectiveness of the Government in Democratic Countries by Ruslan A. Abramov, Rashid T. Mukhaev and Maxim S. Sokolov … 1248

2 Implementation of the UN Genocide Convention of 1948 in the National Laws of the State Parties by Alina Kuanishbekovna Adibayeva … 1263

3 Principal Stages of Democratization and Priorities of Social and Economic Development of Kazakhstan by Nurlykhan B. Adilzhanov … 1272

4 Evaluation Methods of Consumer Satisfaction with Infrastructure Services by Zhannat Salavatovna Aimesheva … 1277

5 The Issues of Increasing the Local Self-Government Efficiency in the Republic of Kalmykia by Saglar S Ashtaeva, Maria V. Shovaeva, Yuriy S. Ashtaev, Tatiana V. Deryugina, and Nina V. Tsuglaeva … 1287

6 Financial Control Over the Activities of State-Owned Corporations in the Russian Federation by Saglar S Ashtaeva, Georgiy L Rubeko, Kermen V Lidzheeva, Anna V Ivanenko and Elvira O Osadchenko … 1294

7 International Standards in the Area of Combating the Financing of Terrorism and Extremism by Diana Bekbolatovna Baisagatova, Madina Orynbaevna Kasimova, Manara Uralchanovna Syzdykova, and Saken Talipbaevich Kemelbekov … 1300

8 Kazakstan’s Role in the Maintenance of Security in Central Asia by Kuralay Irtisovna Baizakova, Ayluna Rakhmetovna Utegenova, Ermek Samarovich Chukubayev, Duman Zhekenov, and Yerkegali Ibraimovich Karakulov … 1311

9 Future of Corporation: Partnership of Owners and Staff by Andrey J. Belobokov, Boris J. Lihtzinder and Ludmila B. Ivanova … 1322

10 Corrupt practice of legal persons as a factor restraining the development of Russia by Julia Pavlovna Chebunina … 1334

11 Higher Educational Institutions of Russia as a Subject of Economic Activity: Innovations and Their Legal Support by Aleksandra A. Dorskaia, Dmitriy A. Pashentsev, Yuliya V. Kurakina, Makka I. Dolakova, and Nataliya S. Shutikova … 1338

12 Legal Aspects of Customs Activity in the Framework of the EAEC by Maryam Dossymbekova, Akif Firudinovich Suleimanov, Kyzgaldak Baizhanova, Gulmyra Saduakacovna Kalieva, and Meruert Oraltaevna Mukazhanova … 1346

Fall 2016 Volume VII, Issue 6(20)

Editor in Chief Madalina Constantinescu Association for Sustainable Education Research and Science, Romania, Romania

Co-Editors

Russell Pittman International Technical Assistance Economic Analysis Group Antitrust Division, USA

Eric Langlais EconomiX CNRS and Université Paris Ouest-Nanterre, France

Editorial Advisory Board

Huseyin Arasli Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus

Jean-Paul Gaertner Ecole de Management de Strasbourg, France Shankar Gargh Editor in Chief of Advanced in Management, India Arvi Kuura Pärnu College, University of Tartu, Estonia Piotr Misztal Technical University of Radom, Economic Department, Poland

Peter Sturm Université de Grenoble 1 Joseph Fourier, France

Rajesh K. Pillania Management Developement Institute, India

Rachel Price-Kreitz Ecole de Management de Strasbourg, France

Andy Stefanescu University of Craiova, Romania Laura Ungureanu Association for Sustainable Education Research and Science, Romania, Romania

Hans-Jürgen Weißbach, University of Applied Sciences - Frankfurt am Main, Germany

ASERS Publishing http://www.asers.eu/asers-publishing ISSN 2068-696X Journal DOI: https://doi.org/10.14505/jarle Journal’s Issue DOI: https://doi.org/10.14505/jarle.v7.6(20).00


1245

13 Problem of Definition of Personal Security in the Modern Russian Criminal Procedure by Alexander Y. Epikhin, and Oleg A. Zaytsev … 1362

14 Prevention of Extraordinary Crimes in Kazakhstan: Legal and Procedural Aspects by Vitaliy Grigoryev, and Anna Alexandrovna Aubakirova … 1368

15 Institutionalization of Intellectual Property on Resource-Saving Technologies and Materials: A Comparative Institutional Study of USA and Russia by Agnessa Inshakova, Daniil Frolov, Svetlana Kazachenok, and Irina Maruschak … 1373

16 Economic and Legal Aspects of Entrepreneurial Development in the Republic of Kazakhstan by Mansour T. Kantureev, Gulnara B. Tuleshova, Asylbek O. Agymbay, Andrey I. Moskvitin, Zaure S. Abdrasilova, and Leila A. Bimendieva … 1383

17 Marketing System Development in Agribusiness of the Republic of Kazakhstan by Rassul Asylbekovich Karabassov, Bazarkhan Ergeshovich Rustembaev, Nurlan Meyrambekovich Kaskatayev, Alyona Viktorovna Hapova, and Zhanara Shansharovna Nurtaeva … 1389

18 Implementation and Administrative Framework of the Inclusive Education in the Context of the European Integration Process

by Anatoliy N. Kulish, Yuriy V. Harust, Oleg N. Reznik, and Maryna S. Utkina … 1399

19 Legislative Regulation and Practice of Imposition of Punishment in the Form of Fine and Forfeiture for the Corruption-Related Crimes in the Republic of Kazakhstan by Zhaniya Kumarbekkyzy, Assel Muratovna Alibekova, and Oxana Borisovna Filipets … 1412

20 Increase of Effectiveness of Organizational and Legal Regulation of State and Municipal Management in Rostov Oblast by Realization of the Concept of Creation of the Center of Emergencies Management

by Andrey V. Kurochkin, and Yuri N. Radachinsky … 1418

21 Regarding the Russia’s Role as a Traditional Capital Exporter in the Modern Context by Larisa Victorovna Lavrenteva, Nataliia Sergeevna Gurtovaya, Irina Sergeevna Vinnikova, Ekaterina Andreevna Kuznetsova, and Marina Viktorovna Ogorodova … 1425

22 Mikhail Speransky on the Basic Principles of Reorganization of the Higher Public Administration by Dzhenevra Lukovskaya, Natalya Sheveleva, Svetlana Volkova, Ilya Vasilyev, and Andrey Ilyin … 1429

23 The Role of Mikhail Speransky in the Financial System Reform by Dzhenevra Lukovskaya, Natalya Sheveleva, Svetlana Volkova, Ilya Vasilyev, and Andrey Ilyin … 1436

24 Trading in Influence: Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Aspects by Zhanat Askarovna Mamitova, Yerbol Omarov Agbayevich, Askar Bolatovich Talkibayev, and Aigul Tanabugovna Irubayeva … 1444


Co-Editors




Huseyin Arasli Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus

Jean-Paul Gaertner Ecole de Management de Strasbourg, France Shankar Gargh Editor in Chief of Advanced in Management, India Arvi Kuura Pärnu College, University of Tartu, Estonia Piotr Misztal Technical University of Radom, Economic Department, Poland










1246

25

Some Aspects of Personality of Individual in International Law (Rights of Individual in the International Criminal Court, Rights of Migrants, Refugees, Rights of Women and Children in International Humanitarian Law, Rights of Investors) by Lyazzat Nyssanbekova, Temir Toktybekov, Saltanat Yessetova, and Zhailau Zhanat … 1455

26 Honor, dignity and business reputation as objects of the protective civil law relations in their judicial protection against defamation by Sergey Viktorovich Potapenko … 1465

27 Current Problems of Entrepreneurship Regulation in the Republic of Kazakhstan Nurzat Sh. Sherimova, Nataliya I. Tukenova, Aigerim M. Baizhumanova, Gulnaz J. Mirambaeva, Bota K. Amirova, and Madi A. Beisenbiev … 1474

28 Revisiting the Issue of the Place of Economic Experiment in the Study of the Economic Dynamics Cyclicity by Nataliia Simchenko, and Svetlana Tsohla … 1479

29 Legal Reform as an Administrative Decision: The Risks and Performance Criteria by Valentina Yu Smorgunova, Аleksandra А. Dorskaia, Dmitriy A. Pashentsev, Evgeniya M. Pavlenko, and Marina V. Ignatieva … 1488

30 The Contribution of the APEC Forum to Resolving Healthcare Issues by Evgenia A. Sokova, and Yekaterina N. Gnatik … 1494

31 Errors on the pre-Trial Investigation: Legal Nature and Causes by Marat Syrlybayev, and Anna Alexandrovna Aubakirova … 1498

32 Development of the Eurasian Economic Union as the Integration Stage in the Eurasian (post-Soviet) Area by Binur Adamovna Taitorina, Aliya Kassymbek, Zhanel Yursunovna Sailibayeva, Elmira Polatovna Kenzhibekova, Anarkhan Raimovna Kuttygalieva, and Elmira Muratkyzy Muratova … 1503

33 Legal and Economic Problems of the Governmental Regulation of Renewable Energy Sources Usage and Development in the Republic of Kazakhstan by Galym Teleuyev, Lazzat Yerkіnbayeva, and Abdimanap Bekturganov … 1512

34 International Legal Aspects of the Environment Protection in Modern Conditions by Zhuldyz Baimuratkyzy Umbetbayeva, Ualikhan Akypbekovitch Akhatov, Bakhytzhan Zhursunovitch Kuandykov, Madiyar Nurdavletovitch Umbetov, and Nursultan Bakytbekovitch Kalkashev … 1522

35 Problem of Definition of Personal Security in the Modern Russian Criminal Procedure by Oleg A. Zaytsev, Aleksander V. Grinenko, Inna V. Makeeva, Larisa M. Zeinalova, Sergei V. Tasakov, Yurii G. Sled, Alexander Y. Epikhin, and Andrei V. Mishin ... 1533

36 Evaluation of Management of the UAPF Pension Assets Based on the Method of Multidimensional Clustering by Aigul Abitzhanovna Zhantayeva, Aizhan Sarsenovna Assilova, Aigul Malibekovna Atchabarova, Diana Baltabaevna Muratova, and Gulmira Amalbekova … 1540


Co-Editors




Huseyin Arasli Eastern Mediterranean University, North Cyprus Jean-Paul Gaertner Ecole de Management de Strasbourg, France Shankar Gargh Editor in Chief of Advanced in Management, India

Arvi Kuura Pärnu College, University of Tartu, Estonia Piotr Misztal Technical University of Radom, Economic Department, Poland









1247

Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics is designed to provide an outlet for theoretical and

empirical research on the interface between economics and law. The Journal explores the various understandings that economic approaches shed on legal institutions.

Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics publishes theoretical and empirical peer–reviewed

research in law and economics–related subjects. Referees are chosen with one criterion in mind: simultaneously, one should be a lawyer and the other an economist. The journal is edited for readability both lawyers and economists scholars and specialized practitioners count among its readers.

To explore the various understandings that economic approaches shed on legal institutions, the Review applies to legal issues the insights developed in economic disciplines such as microeconomics and game theory, finance, econometrics, and decision theory, as well as in related disciplines such as political economy and public choice, behavioral economics and social psychology. Also, Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics publishes research on a broad range of topics including the economic analysis of regulation and the behavior of regulated firms, the political economy of legislation and legislative processes, law and finance, corporate finance and governance, and industrial organization.

Its approach is broad–ranging with respect both to methodology and to subject matter. It embraces

interrelationships between economics and procedural or substantive law (including international and European Community law) and also legal institutions, jurisprudence, and legal and politico – legal theory.

The quarterly journal reaches an international community of scholars in law and economics. Submissions to Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics are welcome. The paper must be

an original unpublished work written in English (consistent British or American), not under consideration by other journals.

Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics is currently indexed in SCOPUS, EconLit, RePec, CEEOL, EBSCO, ProQuest, and Cabell’s Directory.

Invited manuscripts will be due till October 1st, 2016, and shall go through the usual, albeit somewhat expedited, refereeing process.

Deadline for submission of proposals: 1st October 2016 Expected Publication Date: December 2016 Web: http://www.asers.eu/journals/jarle E–mail: [email protected] Full author’s guidelines are available from: http://www.asers.eu/journals/jarle/instructions-for-authors

Call for Papers

Volume VII, Issue 7(21), Winter 2016



1533

Problem of Definition of Personal Security in the Modern Russian Criminal Procedure

Oleg A. Zaytsev

Moscow Academy of Economics and Right, Russia

Aleksander V. Grinenko Moscow State University of International Relations of the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation MGIMO а[email protected]

Inna V. Makeeva

Russian State Social University, Russia [email protected]

Larisa M. Zeinalova

Moscow University named after S.U. Vitte, Russia [email protected]

Sergei V. Tasakov

I. N. Ulianov Chuvash State University, Russia [email protected]

Yurii G. Sled

Kazan Federal University, Naberezhnye Chelny Institute, Russia [email protected]

Alexander Y. Epikhin

Kazan Federal University, Russia [email protected]

Andrei V. Mishin

Kazan Federal University, Russia [email protected]

Suggested Citation:

Zaytsev, Oleg A. et al. (2016). Problem of Definition of Personal Security in the Modern Russian Criminal Procedure, Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, (Volume VII, Fall), 6(20): 1533 – 1539, doi: 10.14505/jarle.v7.6(20).35. Available from: http://www.asers.eu/journals/jarle/jarle-issues.

Article’s History:

Received August, 2016; Revised August, 2016; Accepted September, 2016. 2016. ASERS Publishing. All rights reserved.

Conflict of interests

Authors confirm that the presented data do not contain the conflict of interests.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14505/jarle.v7.6(20).35



1534

Acknowledgements: Work was prepared about use of legal documents of Legal-reference system ‘Consultant Plus’.

Abstract: The article represents comparison of various definitions and concepts related to the phenomenon of providing a secured protection of individuals participating in the Russian criminal procedure. Keywords: individual, public protection, security, security of person, criminal procedure, criminal case,

proceeding on a case, crime prevention, protection of witnesses, protection of victims. JEL Classification: K14, K42. Introduction

The institute of public protection of participants in criminal procedure emerged in the mid-90s, right after adoption of Federal Law ‘On Public Protection of Judges, Officers of Law Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’1.

A few years later, another law concerning security of victims, witnesses and other participants of criminal procedure was adopted 2. In execution of these laws, a number of subordinate acts to control main provisions of the mentioned laws in every detail3 were issued. This was followed by Federal State Programme presupposing financial support to protection measures in the relevant field4.

Legal and methodological basis of public protection and security of an individual in the Russian criminal procedure was developed in various researches of a conceptual significance (Zaitsev 1999, Brusnitsyn 2002, Epikhin 2004).

Among a number of issues on theoretical and legal development of protection of individual rights in the Russian criminal procedure both later and nowadays there is still one concerning interpretation of several definitions.

Personal security in criminal procedure is a synthesis of definitions described by ‘security’, ‘public protection’, ‘individual’, ‘field of criminal procedure’ and a number of the related definitions.

It is essentially and methodologically significant for formation of the required definition to be able to clarify the meaning of security, because we assume it to contain basic concepts of security of person in criminal procedure.

1. Analysis and Comparison of Similar Definitions

To clarify other shades of meaning of security, we should apply for a scheme suggested by N.V. Shchedrin (2000).

He considers this definition in its semantic, legal, doctrinal and comparative sense. ‘Security’ belongs to words with a meaning comprehended both mentally and intuitively. In other words, a

man of sense can grab the essence of this phenomenon without referring to definition dictionaries. This property can probably explain the reason why ‘security’ has no prominent field-specific interpretations. In any context –

1 Federal Law of 20 April 1995 No 45-FL (edited 03 February 2014) ‘On Public Protection of Judges, Officers of Law

Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’ // Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 24 April1995. No 17. Art. 1455. 2 Federal Law of 20 August 2004 No 119-FL (edited 03 February 2014, amended 04 June 2014) «On Public

Protection of the Victims, Witnesses and other Participants in Criminal Procedure’ // Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 23 August 2004. No 34. Art. 3534.

3 Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 27 October 2006 No 630 (edited 15 October 2014) ‘On Ratifying Rules of Applying certain Security Measures to the Victims, Witnesses and other Participants in Criminal Proceedings’, Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 06 November 2006. No 45. Art. 4708; Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 21 September 2012 No 953 (edited 30 January 2015) ‘On Ratifying Rules of Security Measures by Resettlement of the Protected Person to a Different place of Residence Related to victims, Witnesses and other Participants of the Criminal Proceeding’, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation. No 221. From 26 September 2012, etc.

4 Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 13 July 2013 No 586 (edited 05 September 2014) ‘On Ratifying State Programme of ‘Ensuring Security to Victims, Witnesses and other Participants of the Criminal Proceedings for 2014-2015’, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation. 22 July 2013. No 29. Art. 3965.


1535

legal, economic, military, informational, etc. – the meaning of ‘security’ preserves stable genetic references with its core encumbered by the Russian semantics.

We have drawn this conclusion after conducting comparative study of canonic5, normative and doctrinal interpretation of ‘security’.

As an example of doctrinal interpretation, we considered two author’s explanations. The first (short) explanation was given by L. V. Brusnitsyn: ‘security is a condition of physical and psychological safety of an individual’ (Brusnitsyn 1999, 43). The second (extended) description was given by authors of ‘Legal Encyclopaedia’. Quotation: ‘Security is a state of safety of vitally important interests of an individual, society and state from internal and external threats of a political, economic, social, military, industry-related, ecological, informational and any other character presupposing setting of political, economic and social stability in a state, compulsory execution of laws and support of legal order, development of the international cooperation based on partnership’ (Тikhomirov and Tikhomirov 2001).

It can readily be understood that the key moment, which is always present in the mentioned definitions, is the idea of a certain condition, in particular a state of security. Founded on the semantics of ‘a condition’ (in this case it means ‘a condition, internal or external conditions under which someone or something finds oneself or itself’ Ozhegov and Shvedova 2003), we can suppose that security is a static phenomenon rather than dynamic. All processes connected with security are in the area of circumstances forming it. It is where various protection actions meant to support the balance (security) can be found. Meanwhile, this (static) approach to comprehension of security can hardly be right. Yes, security is a condition of balance, a sense of comfort. However, we think that it results from a number of permanent processes – comfort in the center can be achieved by proactive attitude on the periphery. Besides, security presupposes accumulation of specific tools and readiness to work on applying them (the tools) to remove the threat.

Thus, security is genetically based on the idea of proactive actions, movement and action. Probably, in order to single out internal energy of the mentioned definition, scholars prefer to consider security rather than provision of security highlighting its active constituent element. However, from our point of view, security can be interpreted in an active sense and without putting accent on ensuring security (using the word ‘ensuring’). Security should be understood as a synthesis of effects and actions that brought to this result. Meanwhile, from methodological point of view, it is quite important to realize that movement in interpreting security has specific meaning, which is obscure and implicit. This makes it possible to form the majority of special legal definitions of security6.

Normative and legal definition of security was laid down in Law from 5 March 1992 ‘On Security’7, which lost its legal force: ‘security is a condition of safety of vitally important interests of an individual, society and state from internal and external threats’.

Semantic interpretation of ‘security’ is very close to legal and can be interpreted as a feeling of safety. It is seen that all types of security stand for conditions resulting from actions beyond the limits of security.

This (latent activity) is where security differs from security, which is similar in its meaning to the former. This is where its main conceptual specifics lie in.

In this respect, we can only conduct comparative study of interpretation of the definition. The first definition requiring comparison with security, as mentioned above, is a concept of protection. This

set of priorities is predetermined not only by semantic relativity of ‘security’ and ‘protection’ and their interpretation relativity (as a rule, security is explained with the help of protection and its derivatives). It seems important that the concept under study has long been applied in the language of criminal procedure and acquired numerous shades of meaning. Presently, it is applied to denote three areas:

(1) The first area – protection of the suspect, accused, criminal defendant from unwarranted and illegitimate prosecution (this conception is determined by establishing and scientific interpretation of three main criminal procedural functions: accusation, defence and solution of the case on the merits) (Sorokina 1992).

5 Canonic interpretation implies definition of a word suggested by most dictionaries of the Russian language. One of

such dictionaries is S. I. Ozhegov’s Definitions Dictionary. 6 There are 25 legal acts now in Russian that are still in force. They manage various fields of security of a state. 7 Federal law of the Russian Federation ‘On Security’ of 5 March 1992 (edited 25 July 2002), Gazette of the

Congress of people’s Deputies of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation. 1992. No 15. Art. 769; 1993. No 2. Art. 77; Rossiyskaya Gazeta. No 138-139. 30 July 2002. Lost legal force. The law that is in force now does not have a similar definition: Federal Law of 28 December 2010 No 390-Fl ‘On Security’, Rossiyskaya Gazeta. No 295. 29 December 2010.



1536

(2) The second area – judicial protection presupposing rights of persons and a number of procedural actions corresponding to this right and referring to protection of honor and dignity, life and health, individual freedom and property from criminal offence, traverse of indictment or mitigation of responsibility of the accused8.

(3) The third area is connected with protection of participants of the procedure from illegitimate action on them connected with proceedings in criminal case (Polyakov 1998).

Of most interest for us is the use of protection in the third meaning. Active implementation of this terminology in criminal procedure currently takes place on the normative level, although just a few laws applying the concept of ‘protection’ have this definition. For instance, Federal law of the Russian Federation from 20 April 1995 no 45-FL ‘On Public Protection of the Judges, Officers of Law Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’ doesn’t contain the relevant definition9. Meanwhile, we can hardly say that this law doesn’t consider this phenomenon. The core of ‘protection’ can be singled out of the purview of its Article 1: ‘the ensuring of public protection of judges, officers of law enforcement and monitoring agencies, officers of federal public security agencies is based on carrying out measures of security, legal and social protection by the relevant state agencies under the present Federal Law (emphasis added by A. E.), implemented in case of infringement on life, health and property of persons in connection with their employment activities’.

This interpretation is in conformity with a definition given by Law ‘On Public Protection of the Victim, Witnesses and other Participants in Criminal Procedure’10.

As it is seen, definition of protection is connected with security measures, which proves again that the two concepts are almost similar in meaning. However, security and security measures are not the same. The latter has a more narrow sense.

L. V. Brusnitsyn considers that security measures imply prevention as multifunctional legal means ensuring protection of the relevant persons and their relatives in criminal procedure and out of court from legally prohibited and other forms of post-criminal influence and differing in their essence (manner of ensuring protection) to persons they can be applicable, and other criteria (Brusnitsyn 1979).

This definition is interesting in some aspects. (1) Firstly, it denotes advanced (preventive) character of these measures and protection itself; (2) Secondly, it points to legitimacy of this protection, and (3) Thirdly, it shows a vast (manifold) character of the applied measures – the author shows necessity to

ensure protection using not only measures of criminal procedure, but also other legal means, not only in proceedings, but also beyond the limits of relations in criminal procedure.

The doctrinal interpretation of protection measures help to understand the phenomenon of security Meanwhile, legal acts suggest a more profound understanding, with protection being its central meaning. It is the acts to contain one more methodological difference between protection and security.

This difference rests on a fact that protection can be maintained only in case of real threat. Protection is a reaction to an actual threat. Protection is maintained in a dangerous condition. Meanwhile, security is a condition when not only real, but also potential (hypothetical) threats are vital. Thus, protection requires a real reason, while security is based on a potential reason. This is the second important concept.

Thus, when correlating security and protection, we can conclude that protection is a means of ensuring security to the protected persons. It is a main means, but not the only one. This universal tenet is applicable in criminal procedure, too.

We have mentioned above that security is a condition resulting from protective actions. This thesis is proved by comparing semantic meanings of ‘security’ and ‘protection’.

A dictionary of the Russian language defines ‘security’ as ‘a condition, when there is no danger and which provides protection from any danger’ (Ozhegov and Shvedova 2003).

In the Russian language, ‘protection’ stands for ‘safe-keeping, saving someone harmless of infringement, harmful actions, danger; something protecting and serving as defence (Brusnitsyn 1979, 185)’.

8 Ibidem. 9 Federal Law of 20 April 1995 No 45-Fl (edited 03 February 2014) ‘On Public Protection of Judges, Officers of Law

Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’ // Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 24 April 1995. No 17. Art. 1455. 10 Federal Law of 20 April 2004 no 119-FL (edited 03 February 2014, amended 04 June 2014) ‘On Public Protection

of Judges, Officers of Law Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’, Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 23 August 2004. No 34. Art. 3534.


1537

Comparing this definition with interpretation of security, we can conclude that security implies a certain condition (state of things), sometimes a sense (a subjective condition), while protection is a process and a tool (in our conclusion movement is implied both in the first and second interpretations).

These interpretations, as we have mentioned it before, are closely connected. Thus, security (as a condition or a state) stands for being under protection, or in a safe place. Security (as a sense) is a sensation of being beyond danger, safeguarded, i.e. a subjective attitude to place, time, and society a person is living in.

Meanwhile, protection as a process implies obtaining security; it is a number of actions, means and methods of preventing or reducing danger of harmful consequences.

From comparing semantic meanings of security and protection, we can also conclude that security, being a finite condition, serves as the aim, and consequently, it should be a desired result of protection, which serves as a means of obtaining and ensuring security. It should be also taken into account that protection is not the only way (means) of obtaining security; therefore, protection is second to security. Security comprises protection as one its components.

There are some words in the Russian language that are semantically close to ‘security’, which include ‘safeguarding’ and ‘defence’.

They can also denote phenomena concerning regular operation of a system, creation of conditions that save from attacks. Making comparative analysis of security and these two concepts can add some shades of meaning. However, in functional aspect (dwelling on the essence of personal security in criminal procedure) can hardly be of any service to us.

By this, we would like to draw a line under this semantic and comparative analysis of security and proceed with its field related definition.

3. Intermediate results But first we would like to draw some provisional conclusions that can be expressed by giving a definition of security. Security is a complex of conditions providing an object of protection (a person under protection) with a sense of being secured from aggressive threat or actual illegitimate influence from somebody and meant to defend from existing objective threat or the danger of such threat.

This definition characterizes security in a broad sense. It is a basis definition, to some extent. Presently, it is being transformed into a number of field-related concepts. We have given their normative definitions above.

In this respect, it is quite reasonable to put a question about the phenomenon of security in criminal procedure. Is it applicable to introduce such terminology?

Ensuring security to a person in criminal procedure can be restricted only by criminal procedure and means corresponding criminal procedural norms (Article 11, part 3 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure). Security as a complex and interdisciplinary institute includes all means of ensuring security with the help of field-related laws.

We should draw attention to the fact that the Russian scholars are much concerned about discipline-specific and interdisciplinary issues of legal regulation of the institute of security of a person in criminal cases11.

Conclusions We have suggested normative definitions of various kinds of security. Analysis of these definitions shows that a field-related orientation is determined: firstly, by the field, secondly, by the applied means. However, to give a more precise definition of a type of security, it is required to specify an object of security. Thus, if we put a question about security in criminal procedure, it should imply security of a person in criminal procedure.

Meanwhile, the problem of security in criminal procedure is now viewed from a different angle. Last

11 Epikhin A. Y. (2014) Interdisciplinary Issues of Qualification of Corpus Delicti in case of Deliberately Misleading

Evidence, Conclusion of an Expert or a Specialist, or Misleading Interpretation (Art. 307 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), Political, economic and sociocultural aspects of regional participation in the European North: materials of the Final (13th) All-Russia Science conference (October, 23-24 2014, Syktyvkar).: in 3 parts. – Syktyvkar: GOU VO KRGAiSU, 1, 89-97; Epikhin A. Y. (1995) Protection of Legal Rights and Interests of the Witness in Criminal Procedure: Thesis….Doctor of Legal Science М.; Zaytsev O. A.( 2001) Public Protection of Participants in Criminal Justice. M. Examen; Brusnitsyn L. V. (2001) Provision of Security to Persons Promoting Criminal Justice, International Experience in the XX c. (case study of procedural law). M.: OOO Izdatelstvo ‘Yurlitinform’; Epikhin A. Y. (2004) Conception of Provision of Personal Security in Criminal Justice: Synopsis of thesis in candidacy for a degree of Doctor of Legal Science / Nizhegorodskaya Akademiya of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. Nizhny Novgorod.



1538

decades have seen a number of articles with quite ambitious outlines featuring theory of security in the Russian criminal procedure (Galuzin 2004a, Galuzin 2004b).

In conclusion, we should mention that recently conducted researches allow us to conclude about the possibility of combining the concepts of ‘public protection’ and ‘security’, applying them both as two elements of one process of ensuring comfortable participation of a person in criminal proceedings.

References [1] Brusnitsyn, L.V. 1999. Legal Provision of Security of Persons Promoting Criminal Justice. M.: Spark.

[2] Brusnitsyn, L.V. 2001. Provision of Security to Persons Promoting Criminal Justice, International Experience in the XX c. (case study of procedural law). M.: OOO Izdatelstvo ‘Yurlitinform’.

[3] Brusnitsyn, L.V. 2002. Theoretical and Practical Fundamentals and World Experience in Ensuring Security of Persons Promoting Criminal Justice: thesis… Doctor of Legal Sciences, Moscow.

[4] Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 27 October 2006 No 630 (edited 15 October 2014) ‘On Ratifying Rules of Applying certain Security Measures to the Victims, Witnesses and other Participants in Criminal Proceedings’ , Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 06 November 2006. No 45. Art. 4708.

[5] Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 21 September 2012 No 953 (edited 30 January 2015) ‘On Ratifying Rules of Security Measures by Resettlement of the Protected Person to a Different place of Residence Related to victims, Witnesses and other Participants of the Criminal Proceeding’ // Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 26 September 2012 No 221.

[6] Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 13 July 2013 No 586 (edited 05 September 2014) ‘On Ratifying State Programme of ‘Ensuring Security to Victims, Witnesses and other Participants of the Criminal Proceedings for 2014-2015’ // Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation. 22 July 2013. No 29. Art. 3965.

[7] Epikhin, A.Y. 1995. Protection of Legal Rights and Interests of the Witness in Criminal Procedure: Thesis….Doctor of Legal Science M.

[8] Epikhin, A.Y. 2014. Interdisciplinary Issues of Qualification of Corpus Delicti in case of Deliberately Misleading Evidence, Conclusion of an Expert or a Specialist, or Misleading Interpretation (Art. 307 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), Political, economic and sociocultural aspects of regional participation in the European North: materials of the Final (13th) All-Russia Science conference (October, 23-24 2014, Syktyvkar).: in 3 parts. – Syktyvkar: GOU VO KRGAiSU, 1, 89-97.

[9] Epikhin, A.Y. 2004. Conception of Ensuring Security of Persons in the sphere of criminal proceedings: Synopsis of thesis … of Doctor of Juridical Science, Nizhegorodskaya Akademiya of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. Nizhny Novgorod.

[10] Epikhin, A.Y. 2004. Conception of Security of a Person in Criminal Proceedings: thesis… Doctor of Legal Sciences. Syktyvkar.

[11] Federal law of the Russian Federation ‘On Security’ of 5 March 1992 (edited 25 July 2002), Gazette of the Congress of people’s Deputies of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation. 1992. No 15. Art. 769; 1993. No 2. Art. 77.

[12] Rossiyskaya Gazeta. No 138-139. 30 July 2002. Lost legal force. The law that is in force now does not have a similar definition: Federal Law of 28 December 2010 No 390-Fl ‘On Security’, Rossiyskaya Gazeta. No 295. 29 December 2010.

[13] Federal Law of 20 April 1995 No 45-Fl (edited 03 February 2014) ‘On Public Protection of Judges, Officers of Law Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’, Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 24 April 1995. No 17. Art. 1455.

[14] Federal Law of 20 April 2004 no 119-FL (edited 03 February 2014, amended 04 June 2014) ‘On Public Protection of Judges, Officers of Law Enforcement and Monitoring Agencies’, Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 23 August 2004. No 34. Art. 3534.


1539

[15] Federal Law of 20 August 2004 No 119-FL (edited 03 February 2014, amended 04 June 2014) ‘On Public Protection of the Victims, Witnesses and other Participants in Criminal Procedure’, Corpus of legal acts of the Russian Federation. 23 August 2004. No 34. Art. 3534.

[16] Galuzin, O.A. 2004. About the Security Theory in Criminal Procedure, Ugolovnoe Pravo 1: 61–63.

[17] Galuzin, O.A. 2004. On Fundamentals of the Theory of Security of the Criminal Procedure, ‘Black Spots’ in the Russian legislation 1: 278–284.

[18] Ozhegov, S.I., and Shvedova, N.Y. 2003. Definitions Dictionary of the Russian Federation. – M., 41, 741.

[19] Polyakov, M.P. 1998. On Protection of the Accused and from the Accused, Gosudarstvo i Pravo 4: 94–98.

[20] Shchedrin, N.V. 2000. Introduction into Legal Theory of Security Measures. Krasnoyarsk, 46–67.

[21] Sorokina, Y. 1992. Protection at the Preliminary Hearing, Zakonnost 3: 60–61.

[22] Tikhomirov, l.V., and Tikhomirov, M.Y. 2001. Legal Encyclopedia. 5th edition, amended and supplemented, Edited by M/ Y. Tikhomirov. – M., 82.

[23] Zaitsev, O.A. 1999. Theoretical and Practical fundamentals of Public Protection of Participants in Criminal Proceeding in the Russian Federation: thesis…Doctor of Legal Sciences. Moscow

[24] Zaytsev, O.A. 2001. Public Protection of Participants in a Criminal Case. M. Examen.


1567

Web: www.asers.eu URL: http://www.asers.eu/asers-publishing E-mail: [email protected] ISSN 2068-696X Journal DOI https://doi.org/10.14505/jarle Journal’s Issue DOI https://doi.org/10.14505/jarle.v7.6(20).00

‘

‘

AS

ER

S

volume vii issue 6(20) fall 2016 by cristiana by made...volume vii, issue 6(20), fall 2016 1247...

Documents