Organization of judicial and law enforcement agencies. Judicial apparatus

What is the salary of judicial employees? The question is quite interesting and multifaceted. Currently, there is an opinion in society that court employees receive decent salaries. This confidence is based on information about judges’ salaries. They really can reach half a million rubles. But in fact, the situation is a little different, for example, most of the court staff have insignificant salaries. For some of them it reaches an average level of 25 thousand rubles. But first things first.

The importance of the judicial apparatus

The judicial apparatus in any state undoubtedly occupies an important place. After all, maintaining order in the absence of judicial bodies and pre-trial authorities is impossible. We can only hope that the interests of citizens will be protected in court. In today's cruel world, every day someone tries to gain personal gain at the expense of another. It was precisely in order to somehow equalize the rights of all people that the judicial apparatus was formed.

It is believed that the judiciary should always be objective and fair, but in fact the situation is different. The reason for this is that the meaning of the word justice has been distorted and changed its meaning to man. After all, the scales tip in the direction where there is more benefit. It's sad to hear, but it's a fact. But why does this happen? This situation arises mainly due to the fact that the salary level of the court staff does not quite correspond to the volume of work performed. At first glance, it may seem that the payment should be appropriate, after all, this is a state-owned institution, and one that is responsible for law and order in the country. However, this is far from true. Naturally, it is not worth justifying the emergence of corruption in this way, but the state must still take certain measures.

Increasing salaries for judicial staff

One of the Russian newspapers published news that the council of judges had approved a project to increase the salaries of the court staff. The document provides for the assignment of special social status to court employees. In essence, this may mean that these employees will have various new social guarantees, as well as an increase in wages. The initiators of this bill believe that such a decision could benefit individual court employees and normalize the activities of the judicial apparatus as a whole.

It is worth noting that during the entire twelve months of 2014, there was no indexation of salaries of employees of the judicial system. Indexation within the Russian economy makes it possible to protect the country and its population from growing inflation. Although, in the absence of annual indexation, the loss of income to the state treasury is at a lower level. Calculations by the Ministry of Finance indicate that if wages for bailiff service employees are not indexed, then next year it will be possible to save up to 125 billion rubles in the economy. Based on this, we can only guess when the salaries of the court staff will be increased.

Who are court employees?

Courts in our world appeared a long time ago, back in the Ancient World, and were immediately able to find and occupy a certain niche. It is impossible to imagine a modern law enforcement system without courts. Employees of the court apparatus are considered quite valuable, and therefore they are tried not to be deprived of attention. This fact also applies to the level of salary increases for court staff. However, when talking about this authority, it is worth remembering about employees who, as a rule, remain in the shadows. We are talking, for example, about assistant judges and other employees of the judicial system. Undoubtedly, the entire bulk of the work remains with them.

People who are involved as employees of the judicial apparatus bear a special kind of responsibility on their shoulders. Let’s say that despite the fact that they are secretly called “siloviki”, court employees still receive their salaries from the budget. That is, they are universally subject to all the conditions that are provided specifically for this category of citizens. If we take into account the entire circle of workers, it is very extensive. For example, their responsibilities include:

• Full preparation of the entire package of documents for the legal process.
• Preparation of various types of documentation for a wide variety of cases.
• Compiling answers to the questions asked.
• Conducting consulting work with relatives of absolutely all participants in a particular process, etc.

It is worth noting that fulfilling all the above duties is a complex, responsible and time-consuming job. Routine work, as a rule, takes too much time and also requires concentration and perseverance. Therefore, only a small number of people are able to concentrate in order to do their work every day, and with high quality. This requires certain internal qualities and personal characteristics. Therefore, the question arises about increasing the salaries of the court staff.

Note that the next wage indexation during 2017 has been brewing for quite a long time. This happened due to the fact that the work of judicial employees is not as well paid as it may seem, although such specialists have a huge amount of routine work.

The process of forming salaries for judicial employees

The law of the Russian Federation stipulates that the salary of employees of the judicial system should be formed taking into account several parameters. This:

• Level of judicial qualification.
• Additional payments for bonuses and other similar types.
• Job salary.
• Additional payment due for length of service.

To understand how much the court staff salary is required to increase in 2017, let’s look at some of the incomes of this category of workers. However, it is necessary to understand that in an organization of this kind, the income of each employee will directly depend on the status of the employee himself, that is, all senior ranks, of course, receive an order of magnitude more than lower-ranking employees. Actually, you shouldn’t be surprised - a similar situation is observed in almost all areas of work.

Income of the court apparatus in the Russian Federation

As an example, consider the judges representing the Constitutional Court. Their salary level fluctuates around half a million rubles. Next in the ranking are judges representing the Supreme Court. Their salary is about 300 thousand rubles. Then - a judge of the Arbitration Court with a salary of about 200 thousand rubles. The salary is about 50 thousand rubles. But do not forget that ordinary employees of the judicial apparatus receive much less. They amount to about 25 thousand rubles, and this is an insignificant amount compared to the salaries of judges. However, this is not the minimum limit. For example, employees of clerical departments receive even less. For example, an archivist receives about 10 thousand rubles, a clerk’s salary is about 12 thousand rubles, and a legislative secretary’s salary is about 15 thousand rubles.

But let’s figure out why there is such a huge difference. This is because service in government agencies, such as law enforcement agencies, the prosecutor’s office, and the judicial apparatus, is usually classified into federal and state categories. So, judges and prosecutors belong to the federal type of service. And employees of the service supporting the activities of federal employees, as well as secretarial staff, clerks and judicial assistants actually belong to the category of civil government employees. It is precisely this feature that determines the salary part of the salary of court staff, which is subject to regional or federal allowances.

Which court staff should expect a salary increase?

Some Russian financiers believe that the Russian government often makes decisions that are not logical. We are talking about a bill on salaries for court staff. One might assume that the absence of indexation in the court apparatus for several years would improve the economic situation. At the same time, non-governmental organizations notice that the level of salaries of officials, including ministers and deputies, increases every year. Today, the salary level of deputies reaches 650 thousand rubles. It is obvious that this amount will continue to grow in the future. This figure differs significantly from the average salary in the country as a whole, but nevertheless, no one is canceling indexation, as in the case of bailiffs.

Expert research in this area indicates that the wages of the overwhelming majority of officials today are one and a half times higher than the wages of the average budget employee. In some constituent entities of the federation, the level of salaries of officials and various types of deputies is generally twice as high as the average. For example, such a situation occurs in the Yamalo-Nenets Okrug. If we consider the lowest salary level for judicial employees, then, according to data for 2016, it is about 45 thousand rubles. This is exactly the salary that assistant judges of the Republic of Dagestan receive.

Indexation of salaries for court staff

As throughout that year, so this year, wage indexation should not be expected for those whose income is established by a decision of the Russian government or the president. The main goal of such an act is to save money in the budget and in the state economy. And, of course, first of all this concerns judges, military personnel, and prosecutors.

According to experts, these measures will have little impact on the general standard of living of the above-mentioned persons, since the state showed concern for their salaries earlier. And it was the increase in the income level of the vast majority of Russian civil servants that became the last straw in relation to the failure of indexation.

As for the income of employees of the judicial apparatus, the most fortunate are the employees of such departments as the prosecutor's office. Since in 2012, decisions were made at the state level that contributed to increasing the salaries of the court staff annually.

Judges' salaries in 2017

This year, prosecutors were luckier than judges. In October last year their income was increased by 5.5%, but this increase affected only magistrates and Federal courts. These innovations, which at first glance seem insignificant and cannot have a negative impact on the country's economy, ultimately cost the budget a billion rubles.

An important fact is that the salary of the court apparatus is calculated slightly differently than that of other representatives of the bailiff apparatus. At the moment, judges' salaries are calculated based on their qualification level. Also, those who have a long length of service receive a salary increase. Plus, there is a quarterly bonus for judges.

Today there are 36,472 judges in Russia. Taking into account the fact that the salary fund for each of them fluctuates at the level of a couple of million rubles per year, then each of them receives a salary of about 160 thousand rubles per month. As we said earlier, the salary of judges of the Russian Federation, depending on the jurisdiction of their court, ranges from 200 thousand rubles to 500 thousand rubles every month.

Of course, these amounts can only be called small with a stretch, especially when compared with the minimum wage level throughout Russia. Civil servants and military personnel of our state have already fully assessed the consequences of such a phenomenon as withholding the indexation of their incomes. If we take into account the fact that the pension is directly related to the salary, then, accordingly, an increase in the former should not be expected either. So when will the salaries of the court staff be increased? After all, if there is no indexation of judicial salaries by the end of 2017, then it is unlikely that bailiffs should expect an increase in pensions.

Motivation for bailiffs

Some experts argue that government bodies are trying to reduce the level of corruption in the country by increasing the salaries of court staff - bailiffs, but in reality this is not happening, and the country's population has not felt any effectiveness in solving their problems through the courts. If this opinion is taken as a basis, then the decree of the Ministry of Finance and the government to abolish the indexation procedure seems possible to explain. It is also important that savings on salaries allow the state budget to compensate for other current expenses and solve other problems worth several billion rubles.

However, we should not forget that another important problem may arise - psychological. If bailiffs continue to lack indexation and judges’ salaries remain at the same level, this may cause protests. Most likely, judges will not organize strikes due to the lack of indexation, but this can significantly cool their zeal and desire to work.

Is it possible to suspend the implementation of articles on increasing salaries for the judiciary?

Government bodies note that a number of articles in the legislation may still be suspended in their effect for up to three years due to the refusal of the indexation procedure. In this regard, it becomes clear that in the near future there is no need to expect an increase in the salaries of court staff. And this will happen, most likely, when a new massive wave of wage increases begins. However, it is planned to support bailiffs by paying one-time bonuses.

conclusions

It turns out that indexation is not expected for employees of the bailiff service, but bonuses are expected. This indicates that additional expenses will still affect the country’s budget. It is quite clear that in this case such schemes will affect the entire judicial apparatus, including judges and their assistants. All representatives of these positions represent and this suggests that the salaries of court employees are made at the expense of the state budget.

The good news is that this year, most likely, the rates of judicial assistants, as well as secretaries, will be linked to the rates that are payable directly to judges. The binding will be done in a certain percentage. This suggests that court staff will receive proportional salaries. That is, the salary of an assistant judge will directly depend on which judge he works with. The judicial system does not tolerate unprofessionalism and a bureaucratic approach, so the updated laws that the government has adopted are likely to be beneficial.

In addition to the Judicial Department, the body that ensures the activities of the judiciary in the administration of justice in the Russian Federation is the apparatus of the courts (Article 32 of the Law on the Judicial System). But along with this main task, the apparatus of the judiciary performs more specific ones. Thus, they are responsible for organizational, scientific-analytical, reference and informational, logistical, resource, social, and other support for the activities of judicial bodies. In addition, the court apparatus interacts with the executive and legislative authorities of the state. The exceptions are the apparatus of courts of general jurisdiction. The fact is that most of the tasks performed by the apparatus of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the apparatus of the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation are carried out in courts of general jurisdiction by the Judicial Department.

By legal nature, all judicial apparatuses, regardless of the judicial system, judicial level or judicial authority, have approximately the same structure and the same powers. As a rule, the apparatus of the highest-level courts has more structural divisions than the apparatus of the first-level or second-level judicial bodies. In addition, the quantitative composition of the employees of the apparatus of the highest-level courts includes more positions of state civil servants or other employees than the apparatus of the first or second-level courts.

To effectively ensure its activities, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has the following apparatus structure :

Secretariat of the Chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation;

Secretariats of the Deputy Chairmen of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation;

The Offices of the Judges of this Court;

Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation;

Department of Civil Service and Personnel;

Financial management;

Business management;

Representation of the Constitutional Court in Moscow.

In addition, the following positions are being created in the apparatus of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: assistant (adviser) judge, chief consultant, senior consultant, leading specialist - head of records management, head of the secretariat, deputy head of the secretariat, consultant, head of department, head of department, head of the library - chief consultant, head of the archive - senior consultant, adviser to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, business manager, etc.

Organizational support for the activities of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is carried out staff of this Court(Part 2, Article 37).

For the effective administration of justice in the field of business and other economic activities, the Moscow Arbitration Court forms the structure of its apparatus from the following divisions:

Chief of Staff of the Court;

Secretariat of the President of the Court;

Organizational-analytical and control department;

Department of Personnel and Civil Service;

Accounting and Reporting Department;

Office Management Department;

Department of Information Technology;

Common department;

First department;

Business management;

Logistics Department;

Group for registration of applications and documents;

Distribution group.

In these structural divisions of the apparatus of the Moscow Arbitration Court, the following positions are consistent: head of the apparatus, administrator of the arbitration court, deputy head of the apparatus, head of the secretariat of the chairman of the court, manager of affairs, deputy head of the secretariat of the chairman of the court, deputy manager of affairs, head of the department, deputy head of the department, assistant chairman of the court, adviser to the chairman (first deputy chairman) of the court, assistant to the first deputy (deputy) chairman of the court, assistant judge, leading specialist of the 3rd class, chief specialist, secretary of the court session, leading specialist, senior specialist of the 1st category, senior specialist 2, 3rd category.

In the apparatus of district courts, as well as in the apparatus of garrison military courts of general jurisdiction, the following positions are created for the effective administration of justice: head of department, deputy head of department, assistant to the chairman of the court, assistant judge, consultant, chief specialist, leading specialist, court secretary, court secretary , specialist, senior specialist of the 1st category, senior specialist of the 2nd category, senior specialist of the 3rd category.

In the apparatus of the courts of the Russian Federation, the state civil service is provided for in the corresponding positions. To enter the state civil service for positions in the courts, candidates are subject to qualification requirements, which are provided for in Art. 12 of the Law on the State Civil Service and the Qualification Requirements for State Civil Service Positions in the Federal Courts of General Jurisdiction and the Judicial Department System, approved by Order of the Judicial Department dated July 27, 2006 No. 69. These Qualification Requirements for Civil Service Positions are divided into three groups. The first contains qualification requirements for the level of professional education: the presence of a higher professional education is a mandatory requirement for persons filling or applying for civil service positions in the apparatus of courts of general jurisdiction in the categories “managers”, “assistants (advisers)”, “specialists” all groups of civil service positions, as well as the category “supporting specialists” of the main and leading groups of civil service positions. Having a higher legal education is mandatory for persons filling or applying to fill civil service positions in the courts of general jurisdiction, for which the need for such education is provided for by job regulations. For civil service positions in the category “supporting specialists” of the senior and junior groups of civil service positions, it is mandatory to have a secondary vocational education corresponding to the field of activity (clause 2 of the Qualification Requirements).

The second - to the length of service in the state civil service or length of service (experience) in the specialty. Thus, in the offices of courts of general jurisdiction, the following requirements are established for the length of service in the state civil service (civil service of other types):

Higher positions in the civil service - at least six years of experience in the state civil service (other types of civil service) or at least seven years of work experience in the specialty;

Main positions of the civil service - at least four years of experience in the state civil service (other types of civil service) or at least five years of work experience in the specialty;

Leading positions in the civil service - at least two years of experience in the state civil service (other types of civil service) or at least four years of work experience in the specialty;

Senior civil service positions - at least three years of work experience in the specialty;

Junior positions in the civil service - without presenting requirements for length of service (clause 3.1 of the above-mentioned Qualification Requirements).

The third group - to the professional knowledge and skills necessary to perform official duties (clause 4 of the above Qualification Requirements). In this case, we are talking about the professional knowledge and skills of candidates for relevant positions in the courts.

State civil servants performing state civil service in the courts are assigned appropriate class ranks. Class ranks are assigned to civil servants of the courts in accordance with their qualifications and the position they occupy in the federal state civil service.

There are the following class ranks of justice, which are assigned in the courts of the Russian Federation: lawyer 3rd class, lawyer 2nd class, lawyer 1st class, adviser of justice 3rd class, adviser of justice 2nd class, adviser of justice 1st class, state adviser of justice of the Russian Federation 3rd class, state Councilor of Justice of the Russian Federation 2nd class, State Councilor of Justice of the Russian Federation 1st class, Actual State Councilor of Justice of the Russian Federation 3rd class, Actual State Councilor of Justice of the Russian Federation 2nd class, Actual State Councilor of Justice of the Russian Federation 1st class, Actual State Councilor of Justice of the Russian Federation (p 1 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of November 19, 2007 No. 1554 “On the procedure for assigning and maintaining class ranks of justice to persons holding government positions in the Russian Federation and positions in the federal state civil service, and establishing monthly salaries for federal civil servants for class ranks in accordance with class ranks of justice assigned to them.”

In addition, state civil servants of the court apparatus are presented with rules of conduct, which are one of the working conditions of court staff. They are provided for by the Rules of Conduct for Court Staff, approved by Resolution of the Council of Judges of the Russian Federation dated April 27, 2006 No. 156.

Questions for self-control

1. What is the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation?

2. What is the composition and system of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation?

3. What divisions are included in the structure of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation?

4. Who heads the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation?

5. What are the requirements for persons entering the civil service in the system of the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation?

Court and law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation: a textbook for universities / edited. ed. V.V. Ershova. – 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Yurayt Publishing House; Publishing House Jurayt, 2013. P. 316.

See: Mironov A. A. Commentary on the Federal Law of January 8, 1998 No. 7-FZ “On the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation” / ed. E. V. Shkunova. Access from the reference legal system "Garant".

See: Nekhaev V.V., Nekhaeva T.G., Bespalov V.P. Commentary on the Federal Law “On the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation” (article-by-article). M.: Justitsinform, 2007. pp. 7-8.

Osipova I. N. Commentary on the Federal Law of January 1995 V" 4-FZ "On the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation". URL: http: // consbltant-ru> (date of access - September 11, 2012).

URL: http:// hghltd.yandex.net/yandbtm?text=appapat (accessed September 2012).

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is a judicial body of constitutional control, independently and independently exercising judicial power through constitutional proceedings.

The Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation” clearly defines the nature, essence and place of the Constitutional Court in the system of government bodies. Consequently, the Constitutional Court is, first of all, an integral part of the judicial power of Russia, designed to keep all branches of government within the bounds of law.

In order to protect the foundations of the constitutional system, fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen, to ensure the supremacy and direct effect of the Constitution of the Russian Federation throughout the entire territory, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation:

1. Decide cases on compliance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation:

Federal laws, regulations of the President of Russia, the Federation Council, the State Duma, the Government of the Russian Federation;

Constitutions of republics, charters, as well as laws and other normative acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

Agreements between state authorities of Russia and state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as mutual agreements between the latter;

International treaties of the Russian Federation that have not yet entered into force;

2. Resolve disputes about competence:

Between federal government bodies;

Between government bodies of the Russian Federation and government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

Between the highest state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

3. Verify the constitutionality of the law applied or to be applied in a particular case, based on complaints of violations of the constitutional rights of citizens and upon requests from the courts;

4. Give an interpretation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation;

5. Give an opinion on compliance with the established procedure for bringing charges against the President of Russia for high treason or committing another serious crime;

6. Take legislative initiatives on issues within your jurisdiction;

7. Exercise other powers granted to him by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Federal Treaty and federal constitutional laws; may also use the rights granted to him by agreements concluded in accordance with Article 11 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the delimitation of jurisdiction and powers between government bodies of the Russian Federation and government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, if these rights do not contradict its legal nature and purpose as a judicial body of constitutional control .

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation resolves exclusively questions of law. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, when carrying out constitutional proceedings, refrains from establishing and examining factual circumstances in all cases when this falls within the competence of other courts or other bodies. Federal constitutional law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”// Rossiyskaya Gazeta. July 23. 1994. Art. 3

The powers of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation are not limited to a certain period. Federal constitutional law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”// Rossiyskaya Gazeta. July 23. 1994. Art. 4

According to the current legislation, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation consists of 19 judges appointed to the position by the Federation Council on the proposal of the President of the Russian Federation. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has the right to carry out its activities if it contains at least 3/4 of the total number of judges. Federal constitutional law "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation" // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. July 23. 1994. Art. 4 The presentation of the President of the Russian Federation is prepared and submitted in compliance with the established procedure. The main provisions of this order are defined in Art. 9 of the Law on the Constitutional Court. Proposals for candidates for the positions of judges of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation may be submitted to the President of the Russian Federation by members (deputies) of the Federation Council and deputies of the State Duma, as well as legislative (representative) bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, higher judicial bodies and federal legal departments, all-Russian legal communities, legal scientific and educational establishments.

The Federation Council considers the issue of appointing a judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation no later than fourteen days from the date of receipt of the proposal from the President of the Russian Federation. Each judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is appointed to the position individually by secret ballot. A person who receives a majority of the total number of members (deputies) of the Federation Council during voting is considered to be appointed to the position of judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

In the event of a judge leaving the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, a proposal to appoint another person to a vacant position as a judge is submitted by the President of the Russian Federation no later than one month from the date the vacancy opens.

A judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation whose term of office has expired continues to act as a judge until a new judge is appointed to the position or until a final decision is made on the case initiated with his participation. Federal constitutional law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”// Rossiyskaya Gazeta. July 23. 1994. Art. 9

The Federal Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court establishes that a judge of the Constitutional Court can be a qualified lawyer with an impeccable reputation, at least 40 years of age and with at least 15 years of experience in the legal profession. A judge of the Constitutional Court is appointed for a term of 12 years. Appointment to this position for a second term is not permitted. The age limit for holding the position of a judge is 70 years. A judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is considered to have taken office from the moment he takes the oath. His powers terminate on the last day of the month in which his term of office expires or in which he reaches seventy years of age. No one has the right to change a judge, no one has the right to interrupt his powers except in the manner and on the grounds established by this Law. The Federal Constitutional Law provides full guarantees of the independence of judges. Commentary on the Constitution of the Russian Federation. M. BEK Publishing House, 1994. P.392-396; P.394

A judge is considered to have resigned or been removed if his powers are terminated on the grounds provided for in paragraphs 2, 3 and 9 of Part 1 and Part 2 of Art. 18 of the Federal Law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. A retired judge of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation is also subject to other provisions of the status of a retired judge established by the Federal Law on the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Federal constitutional law "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation" // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. July 23. 1994. Art. 19

COMPOSITION OF THE COURT - judges and assessors (people's, jurors, arbitration) authorized to consider and make a decision on a specific case or an issue that arose during its proceedings. It may vary depending on what kind of case (civil or criminal) and in what court (see: Judicial instance) it is being heard. The trial of criminal cases at first instance is possible in four compositions of the court: - one judge (cases of crimes punishable by no more severe punishment than five years of imprisonment). Such S. s. possible if the defendant is an adult. This rule does not apply to mid-level military and civilian courts and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: in them, all criminal cases at first instance must be dealt with collectively. It also does not apply to all juvenile criminal cases; - one professional judge and two people’s assessors (cases about crimes for which in a district court a prison term of more than five years can be imposed, and in all other courts - any type of punishment; this includes all cases about crimes of minors); - three professional judges (with the consent of the accused in cases under the jurisdiction of all civil and military courts of mid-level, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation), if the decision on the formation of such a S. p. accepted by the relevant court; - one professional judge and twelve jurors. Such collegiums are formed in some mid-level civil courts, as well as in all mid-level military courts and in the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upon the request of the defendant in cases of crimes within the jurisdiction of these cases. Currently, civil cases at first instance can be considered by courts of general jurisdiction in two compositions of the court: a single judge or a panel consisting of a professional judge and two lay judges. In fact, most of these types of cases are considered by a single judge. Cases within the jurisdiction of arbitration courts are considered at first instance in most cases by single judges of arbitration courts of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Under the conditions specified in the law, it is possible to hear cases in a collegial composition. In these cases, the panel of judges includes professional judges working in a given arbitration court. But it is also possible to form a collegial composition of one professional judge and two arbitration assessors. In the cassation, In supervisory and appellate instances, hearing cases is possible only in a collegial composition. For example, in the judicial chambers of mid-level courts of general jurisdiction and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, it is carried out by three professionals, and in the presidiums of these courts - by at least half of the members of the presidium. Approximately the same scheme is used to determine the composition of arbitration courts that consider cases in the appellate, cassation and supervisory procedures.

In the Russian Federation, organizational support for the activities of a federal court of general jurisdiction in the administration of justice is carried out by appara t of this ships.

The management of the activities of the apparatus of a federal court of general jurisdiction is carried out by the chairman of the relevant court.

Structure, number of employees and staffing of the federal court of general jurisdiction(with the exception of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation) are determined by the chairman of the relevant court in agreement with the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation within the limits of the total number of employees of federal courts of general jurisdiction and budgetary allocations provided for by the federal budget for the corresponding financial year and planning period.

Important! Please keep in mind that:

• Each case is unique and individual.
• A thorough study of the issue does not always guarantee a positive outcome. It depends on many factors.

To get the most detailed advice on your issue, you just need to choose any of the options offered:

The regulations on the apparatus of a federal court of general jurisdiction, with the exception of the regulations on the apparatus of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, are approved by the Judicial Department of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Possible composition of the staff of a court of general jurisdiction:

• assistant to the chairman of the court (judge);
• court administrator;
• assistant referee;
• court secretary;
• office for criminal cases;
• civil affairs office;
• court reception;
• Human Resources Department;
• archivist.

Functions of the apparatus of a court of general jurisdiction(Article 39 of the Federal Law on Courts of General Jurisdiction)

Staff of the court of general jurisdiction:

1. accepts and issues documents;
2. certifies copies of court documents;
3. serves documents, notices and calls;
4. controls payment and fees;
5. carries out organizational and preparatory actions in connection with the appointment of cases for hearing;
6. assists judges in involving jurors in the administration of justice;
7. ensures the keeping of minutes of court hearings;
8. keeps records of the progress of cases and the timing of their passage in court;
9. ensures recourse to the execution of court decisions;
10. carries out storage of files and documents;
11. participates in summarizing data from judicial practice, conducts judicial statistics, information and reference work on the legislation of the Russian Federation and other work;
12. receives .

A significant part of the work performed in district courts falls on the share of its apparatus, which directly ensures organizationally not only the administration of justice, but also the generalization of judicial practice, the collection and analysis of judicial statistics, recording and systematization of legislation, as well as the performance of other tasks.

The closest assistants to chairmen (district judges), along with assistants, are court administrators. The introduction of such positions in courts of general jurisdiction at all levels, including district courts, is provided for in Art. 17 of the Law on the Judicial Department. The court administrator takes measures to provide organizational and material support for the activities of the court, interacts with law enforcement and other government agencies on issues of ensuring the activities of the court, provides information and legal support for the activities of the court, organizes the maintenance of judicial statistics, records management and the work of the archive, organizes the security of the building, premises and other property of the court during non-working hours, ensures the work of the economic service, and carries out other measures to ensure the activities of the court.

Head of the office is primarily responsible for the distribution of work among office staff, controls its execution, ensures the safety of log books, official correspondence, books of orders and orders for the court and other documentation, draws up official correspondence with higher judicial authorities, law enforcement and other government agencies, public associations, and enterprises .

Court clerks conduct office work on court cases subject to consideration by specific judges. They store case materials, maintain the necessary journals and cards, ensure the storage of material evidence in criminal cases, draw up completed cases and hand them over to the archives.

Secretary of the court session keeps minutes of court hearings, sends subpoenas to trial participants and witnesses, provides information about the place and time of consideration of cases scheduled for hearing.

In every court, regardless of what part of the judicial system it is, there is a functioning court apparatus. It is intended to organizationally ensure the consideration of specific cases by the court. Unlike the Ministry of Justice and its bodies, which are designed to resolve general issues of organizational support for the activities of the court, the court apparatus concentrates its efforts on creating organizational conditions for the administration of justice in specific cases. In recent years, certain changes have occurred in the court apparatus. As legislation reform takes place, judges must use more and more new regulations in their work. The courts have not been immune to the use of electronic data retrieval systems and technological innovations. And this implies changes in the staff of the court staff. The growing volume of cases places new demands on the Belarusian judicial system. It is possible that with an increase in the number of judges, the number of assistant judges, consultants, secretaries and other court staff will also increase, and this may lead to the delegation of some powers of judges, especially in preparing a case for hearing.
11The concept and system of principles of justice

Justice is carried out on the basis of principles - general provisions reflecting its nature. At the same time, they are justice and objective. Legislative bodies create the principles of justice, and discover existing ones. But the principles of justice also have a subjective aspect, since they are formulated by people and enshrined in legal acts. It is through legal norms that the principles of justice can influence the behavior of participants in legal relations.

The normative side of the principles of justice indicates that from the outside they represent rules of law, the observance of which is ensured by the power of the state.

In the current legislation, the principles of justice are reinforced in two ways. They are either directly expressed in a separate rule, or follow from several specific rules of law, which together reflect one or another aspect of the principle. The norms that most fully reflect the principles are called norms-principles. They influence not individual social relations, but their entire system, giving it the direction of movement. Thanks to them, entire blocks of social relations are fixed. The boundaries of the regulatory influence of the principles of justice are quite wide. Some principles of justice are reflected in the form of norms and principles in the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Code of Civil Procedure, and other normative legal acts regulating justice. It is important that the norms and principles are adequate in their essence to the principles of justice as an objective phenomenon. Since the principles of justice reflect the nature of justice and are highly stable, it is desirable that they be formulated in the form of norms-principles. Science plays a great role in finding the principles of justice. It is designed to assist legislative authorities in identifying new principles, in search of such ways of expressing and formulating them that would correspond to the level of development of the state and society and reflect human interests.

So, the principles of justice are the basic legal provisions that express the nature and essence of justice, formulated in legal acts in the form of norms-principles, or arising from a system of specific legal norms. We can name two ways of fixing the principles of justice: 1) describing the content of the principle in the norm-principle and its further detailing in specific norms; 2) inclusion in the text of specific legal norms of a description of individual aspects of the principle. When enshrining the principles of justice in laws, legal techniques are of secondary importance. It is important that the rules of law are adequate in their essence to the principles of justice as an objective phenomenon. It is preferable, however, to use this approach: the general properties of the principle of justice are reflected in the norm-principle, and its content is determined in specific rules of law. Norms-principles form the boundaries of the action of a given principle and thereby meet the requirements of its logical independence from other principles.

The principles of justice, permeating all justice, all court activities in considering and resolving cases, are especially manifested in various types of justice. Justice in constitutional, civil, and judicial administrative cases is carried out only in a judicial process that combines a number of stages. At each of them there is a unique refraction of the principles of justice. The criminal process consists of pre-trial (investigative) criminal procedural activities and judicial criminal procedural activities. The principles of justice are implemented in the judicial stages of the criminal process, especially in the stage of trial, when the court makes a guilty or acquittal verdict. In the pre-trial stages of the criminal process they are just beginning.

The implementation of the principles of justice in specific stages of the judicial process depends on many circumstances, in particular, on the tasks that need to be resolved at each stage of the process, the status of the bodies and officials conducting the proceedings, the participation of members of the public and the resolution of the legal conflict, the degree of detail of the legislation, regulating judicial activities. However, the principles of justice are not disunited. On the contrary, they are all interconnected and represent a system that influences the behavior of participants in legal relations.

When identifying the principles of justice, it is necessary to put in place the following main criterion: a legal norm that claims to be a norm-principle must cover a fairly wide area of ​​social relations taking place in the administration of justice, and not duplicate other general norms. The system of principles of justice must include such a combination of them that the loss of one of them will lead to a violation of the system, the impossibility of its functioning in the form in which it is programmed in legislation.

Based on the proposed criterion, the system of principles of justice includes: administration of justice only by the court; independence of judges in the administration of justice; equality of trial participants before the law and the court; publicity of justice; competition in the administration of justice; ensuring the accused's right to defense; comprehensiveness, completeness and objectivity of the study of the circumstances of the case in the administration of justice; use of the state language in the administration of justice; transparency of justice; participation in the administration of justice by people's assessors or jurors.

All these principles are equivalent. The order in which they are listed does not matter. Removing any of them will not lead to its replacement by the remaining ones.

62 Inquiry bodies, their tasks and competence. Inquiry is one of the forms of preliminary investigation of crimes. In addition to carrying out the inquiry, the bodies of inquiry are charged with the responsibility of reviewing and resolving applications and reports of crimes; carrying out investigative and search actions on orders and instructions of investigators; providing assistance to investigators in carrying out individual investigative actions, etc.

The Code of Criminal Procedure distinguishes two forms of inquiry:

1) inquiry in cases in which preliminary investigation is mandatory;

2) inquiry, in cases in which a preliminary investigation is not necessary.

Inquiry into cases in which preliminary investigation is mandatory , consists in the fact that the body of inquiry initiates a criminal case, carries out urgent investigative actions to establish and consolidate traces of the crime. For example, conducts an inspection of a crime scene, search, interrogation, etc.

Inquiry in cases in which the preliminary investigation does not necessarily consist of the fact that the inquiry body initiates a case and takes all measures provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure to establish the circumstances to be proven in a criminal case. In this category of criminal cases, the materials of the inquiry are the basis for consideration in court.

The inquiry is conducted by the head of the inquiry body. He can entrust the inquiry to subordinates, who during the conduct of the inquiry are called persons conducting the inquiry, i.e. interrogators. Between the head of the inquiry body and the person conducting the inquiry (investigator), there are, on the one hand, relations of an official nature, and on the other, criminal procedural relations as participants in criminal proceedings. The person conducting the inquiry (investigator) evaluates the evidence according to his inner conviction, based on a comprehensive, complete and objective study of the circumstances of the case in their totality. It has the right to appeal the instructions of the head of the inquiry body to the supervising prosecutor, and the instructions of the supervising prosecutor - to a higher prosecutor. However, an appeal does not suspend the implementation of the instructions.

The Code of Criminal Procedure exhaustively defines the list of investigative bodies. The system of inquiry bodies includes various government bodies. Inquiry is carried out by them along with other functions.

1. Police are a special, universal body of inquiry. The law does not limit their competence to a certain nature of criminal cases, as is stipulated in relation to other investigative bodies.

The police of the Republic of Belarus consists of: 1) criminal police; 2) public security police; 3) special police; 4) transport police; 5) police to combat organized crime and corruption. They interact to complete the tasks assigned to them.

2. State bodies Security.3. Commanders of military units, formations, heads of military institutions and garrisons. 4. Heads of institutions executing criminal punishments in the form of imprisonment and pre-trial detention centers - in criminal cases of crimes against the established order of service, committed by employees of these institutions, as well as in criminal cases of crimes committed at the location of these institutions.

It should be noted that the heads of these institutions have the right of inquiry in two categories of cases: 1) on crimes against the established procedure for performing service, committed by employees of these institutions; 2) about crimes committed at the location of these institutions. 5. Border Troops Bodies - in criminal cases assigned by law to their jurisdiction. Border troops have the right to conduct inquiries in cases of violations or attempts to violate the state border. They take operational investigative measures, carry out arrests, searches, inspections, interrogations and other investigative actions. 6. Customs authorities - in criminal cases assigned by law to their jurisdiction. Customs activities are the exclusive monopoly of the state. This activity is carried out within the customs territory and customs border of the Republic of Belarus. 7. Financial investigation authorities - in criminal cases assigned by law to their jurisdiction.

8. State fire authorities - By

criminal cases involving fires and violations of fire safety regulations.

For state fire supervision authorities, conducting an inquiry is not their only and main function. Their main tasks are to prevent fires and ensure fire safety. 9. Sea or river captains ships, commanders of aircraft located outside the Republic of Belarus, - in criminal cases of crimes committed on ships. The jurisdiction of the body of inquiry represented by the captain extends to all crew members, passengers and all other persons on board the ship, with the exception of persons enjoying diplomatic immunity. 10. Heads of diplomatic missions And consular offices of the Republic of Belarus - in cases of crimes committed within the territory of these representative offices.

22. Concept And main features of the judiciary

The thesis that the judiciary should represent an absolutely independent and independent part of state power was first put forward in the 18th century by the jurist and philosopher Charles de Montesquieu in his theory of separation of powers. He believed that power in the state should be divided into three parts: executive, legislative and judicial, that there is no freedom where the judicial power is not separated from the executive And legislative. In Soviet times, this concept was rejected, but is now recognized as the only correct one, which is reflected in Art. 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, which states: “State power in the Republic of Belarus is exercised on the basis of its division into legislative, executive And judicial State bodies are independent within the limits of their powers: they interact with each other, restrain and balance each other.” In Art. 109 of the Constitution directly states that “Judicial power in the Republic of Belarus belongs to the courts,” that is, the Constitution determines that judicial power is one of the types of state power.

The judiciary is a system of independent courts vested with the authority to finally resolve legal disputes on behalf of the state and apply state measures provided for by law to persons guilty of committing offenses.

There are other approaches to defining judicial power. Judicial power can be defined as powers granted by law to special state bodies - courts, exercised through constitutional, civil, criminal, administrative proceedings in compliance with procedural forms that create a guarantee of the legality and fairness of decisions made by courts.

The judiciary has a number of characteristics.

1. Judicial power is exercised by special state bodies - courts.

2. Exclusiveness of the judiciary.

3. Independence, independence and isolation of the judiciary.

4. Judicial power is exercised through legal proceedings.

5. Judicial power is exercised on the basis and in strict accordance with procedural law.

6. The authoritative nature of the powers of the court.