The article analyzes the main provisions of the monograph “Modern Chinese State. Vol. 1: Basic Institutions of State Power and Administration”, published in 2022 by the Russian Academy of Sciences, ...in the context of the problematization of scholarly studies of Chinese law. The authors of the article give a brief description of the main issues disclosed in the monograph, such as: administrative divisions of the People’s Republic of China (PRC); population control and registration; the judicial system of the People’s Republic of China; the Public Prosecutor’s Office; control (supervisory) committees; and so on. At the same time, attention is focused on those provisions of the monograph that contribute to the search for solutions to problematic issues relevant to lawyers studying the law of the People’s Republic of China. This is, in particular, about the lawmaking of the state bodies of the PRC with the understanding of the role of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in this activity, on the Legal Status of the President of the People’s Republic of China, on the Nature of CPC Acts, as well as Joint Acts of the Central Party Organs and the State Council of the People’s Republic of China, on the role of judicial acts in the light of the system of sources of Chinese law. A number of areas of legal regulation have been identified, where the experience of the People’s Republic of China can be used in lawmaking and law enforcement in the Russian Federation. It is concluded that the monograph systematizes and increases knowledge about the state-legal reality of the PRC, allows to achieve a better understanding of the law of China.
An analysis of the text of Article 176 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation "Grounds for Inspection" indicates a discrepancy between its title and content. The concept of "grounds ...for inspection" is not contained or disclosed in this article, and the objectives of the inspection are formulated incorrectly and do not express the specifics of the investigative action in question. In practice, this leads to a misunderstanding of the purpose of the inspection and, as a result, to the ineffectiveness of its application in specific situations. In some cases, the lack of a clear and understandable definition of the grounds and purposes of the inspection leads to the inadmissible substitution of other investigative actions (for example, a search) by the inspection and, thus, to the violation of the rights of citizens whose interests are affected by the conduct of such an action. As a result of the analysis of legislation, the practice of its application and scientific literature, the authors come to the conclusion that it is necessary to distinguish between general and special legal grounds (permits) for inspection. A general legal permission is a written decision (resolution) to initiate criminal proceedings (in exceptional cases, a report of a crime). A special legal permission is an oral decision (expressed outside the will of the investigator) to conduct an inspection. At the same time, the objects of inspection are various kinds of material traces that are important for establishing the presence or absence of the circumstances of the criminal case (single real objects or groups of objects, their attributes, properties and states, location environment). Sufficient evidence obtained from a legally recognized non-procedural or procedural source to indicate the existence of such traces constitutes the factual basis for the inspection that will be carried out for the purpose of their detection, recording and seizure.
Based on the analysis of domestic historical experience and the current state of the legislative regulation of the involvement of a specialist to assist an investigator in investigative proceedings, ...as well as the survey of investigators, it is concluded that it is necessary to expand the powers of a specialist in terms of rendering assistance to an investigator during investigative actions aimed at obtaining testimony (including interrogation). In this regard, proposals to amend the wording of Articles 38 and 58 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are made. The proposed changes will significantly expand the powers of a specialist in the course of all investigative actions (including verbal ones) and will correspond to the modern trends in the development of criminal proceedings, increasing its quality by attracting specific knowledge and skills from various fields of human activity
PDF
