Limit for subscription

The head of the State Duma Committee on Criminal Law, Uneneros Pavel Krasheninnikov and his deputy, also Viktor Pinin, also introduced a bill to the Lower Chamber, changing the procedure for taking subscriptions of non -disclosure during the investigation of criminal cases. This was reported by "Vedomosti".

The draft amendment to Part 2 of Article 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure suggests that a non -disclosure subscription should be drawn up as a separate procedural document. It is also established that such a subscription can only be taken in connection with the participation of persons in the criminal proceedings. Finally, the list of information on which the non -disclosure subscription cannot be determined. This is the data contained in petitions and complaints, as well as information on procedural decisions in connection with criminal prosecution, in particular on initiating a criminal case, charging and choosing a preventive measure.

"The adoption of the bill will create a reasonable balance between the principle of inadmissibility of violation of the rights and legitimate interests of participants in criminal proceedings and other persons and the interests of the preliminary investigation," the publication quotes the explanatory note to the document.

As Krasheninnikov explained to the newspaper, now no one is versed in whether in each case, a subscription of non -disclosure is required or not. “There were cases when the elderly called the investigator and they signed everything they need,” said Uneneros. “There are people who after that even cease to communicate with loved ones, so we need concretization in essence and form.”

Meanwhile, a month ago, notes the publication, the committee headed by Krasheninnikov, rejected the similar bill introduced by the reference Alexander Ageev and Valery Martung. Their document assumed that the investigator, taking subscriptions of non -disclosure from lawyers, should clearly explain to them what exactly the secret consists, which cannot be disclosed. The relevant committee said that the bill contradicts the general approach to the secret of the investigation.

Gartung, in connection with the initiative of Krasheninnikov and Pinsky, noted that this practice has long developed in the State Duma: unicorns reject the initiatives of other parties, and then they themselves contribute them as their own.

The Constitutional Court resembles the "Vedomosti", five complaints about the institute of non -disclosure subscriptions have already been filed. In particular, such paper was served by the Crimean prisoner Oleg Sentsov and his lawyer Dmitry Dinze. They claim that a non -disclosure subscription violates the principle of equality of the parties before the law, guarantees of a fair trial, as well as the presumption of innocence and the right to defense.

Another complaint was filed by the lawyer of the “team 29” Ivan Pavlov. He believes that the court must make a decision on non -disclosure of certain information, not a consequence. The adoption of such decisions by the investigator gives him more rights than a lawyer.