Complaint against a judge to the chairman of the court, council of judges, collegium

The conditions for normal legal proceedings are compliance with their duties by all parties to the process. The court, endowed with the most important powers, must make informed and lawful decisions. The perpetrators, in turn, must comply with the issued acts.

But the fairness of the process can be violated on both sides. The making of deliberately illegal decisions by the court, as well as evasion of punishment are crimes, and liability for their commission is provided for in Articles 305 and 314 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, respectively.

Reasons for complaints against judges

Most often, statements against representatives of Themis are written in cases of obvious violations of judicial ethics and norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, which is expressed in the following:

Cases have been pending for years, while the period of their consideration under Art. 154 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation should not exceed 2 months.
The judge deliberately ignores evidence and testimony of witnesses that confirm the position of one of the parties, and also shows interest in a certain outcome of the trial.
The minutes of the trial do not correspond to the content of the trial and the testimony of its participants.
The judge deliberately does not give the floor to the plaintiff or defendant or ignores the participants’ request to include available evidence in the case.
Themis representative during the proceedings advises one of the parties or pre-approves the progress of the case with the state prosecutor.

According to the current legislation, judges are independent (Article 9 of the Federal Law-3132-1 “On the status of judges in the Russian Federation”). They can be brought to disciplinary liability if the listed acts took place and were proven by the injured party. They are brought to criminal liability only if it is proven that the sentence that has entered into legal force was passed on the basis of criminal abuse of official position or is deliberately unjust.

Gifts and tips

[Criminal Code of the Russian Federation] [Chapter 31] [Article 305]

1. Issuance by a judge (judges) of a knowingly unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act -

shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to three hundred thousand rubles, or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to two years, or by forced labor for a term of up to four years, or by imprisonment for a term of up to four years.

Consequently, termination of an employment contract on this basis is illegal and should be cancelled. The court considers that there are no preconditions for the termination of the employment contract concluded between the parties in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 325 of the Labor Code and, therefore, since there is no valid consent of the employer for its termination, that knowledge of the worker. If she does not do this, the offer is considered not accepted. Again, in the employer's favor, recognizing that the two points of consent and the issuance of a Termination Order may coincide, it is essential that this consent is communicated to the country within seven days.

2. The same act, connected with the issuance of an illegal court sentence to imprisonment or entailing other grave consequences, -

shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three to ten years.

3 comments on the entry “Article 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Issuance of a knowingly unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act”

Once this has not been complied with, and subject to the provisions of Article 325(1)(1) of the Labor Code, the offer shall be deemed not to have been accepted. Defendant offers no evidence to show that he notified T of the written opinion. After they do not participate in evidence - written or sworn, there is no such notice to the court.

As a result, the employment relationship was terminated without just cause, and the impugned order was also illegal. The Russouvolution and its annulment lead to the conclusion on the merits of the complaint in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 344 of the Labor Code, Article 25, paragraph 1 of the Labor Code, about the award of compensation in favor of the plaintiff for a period of 6 months, during which, as a result of his illegal dismissal, he does not work. The total amount for the declared period is 40 levs. In view of the above, the claim filed on the basis of Article 344, para. 1, clause 3 of the Labor Code, art. 25, paragraph 1 of the Labor Code, is justified and proven in the submitted full application.

Commentary on Article 305

1. The main object of this crime is social relations that ensure the court resolves the tasks facing it in achieving the goals of justice. An additional object is the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a party to a lawsuit or another person whose rights and interests are affected by the relevant judicial act. 2. From the objective side, this crime consists of making, i.e. acceptance, execution (including signing) and, if provided by law, proclamation of a deliberately unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act. The concept of “judicial act” is used in the commented article as a generic one, denoting judicial documents adopted at any stage of constitutional, civil, administrative, arbitration or criminal proceedings, either by a single judge or by a collegial composition of the court. These can be acts adopted both on the merits of the case (in constitutional proceedings this is a resolution or conclusion, in civil, arbitration proceedings - a decision, in criminal proceedings - a verdict), and based on the results of checking their legality and validity, or on other issues arising in the course of the proceedings on the case issues (on the measure of restraint, on the measure of securing a civil claim, on the collection of legal costs). The form in which a particular judicial act is presented varies depending on the type of legal proceedings, the content of the issue being resolved, the stage of the process, and the composition of the court. In addition to the above-mentioned verdict and decision, this can be a decree, determination, private resolution (definition), order. The subject of the crime provided for in the commented article can only be such judicial acts that, in their significance, go beyond the scope of legal proceedings and significantly affect the rights and legitimate interests of certain persons. Thus, the judge’s issuance of groundless decisions to reject a party’s requests to order a forensic examination or to postpone a court hearing does not entail liability. Nor are such acts which, although adopted by a judicial body, are related to the implementation of legal proceedings in a specific case (for example, a decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on changing the composition of chambers, a resolution of the Presidium of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation on approval of a review of judicial practice) are not the subject of the crime provided for in the commented article. . By virtue of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated October 18, 2011 N 23-P “In the case of verifying the constitutionality of the provisions of Articles 144, 145 and 448 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 8 of Article 16 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation” in connection with a complaint from citizen S.L. Panchenko” bringing the judge to criminal liability and his conviction under Art. 305 of the Criminal Code are possible only on the condition that the court decision made by him was recognized as unjust, i.e. illegal, unreasonable or unfair, by a higher court. This, however, does not exclude the possibility that, regardless of the cancellation or modification of the unjust decision made by the judge, he may be held criminally liable for committing other crimes, as a rule, accompanying the crime provided for in the commented article, such as, for example, fraud, abuse official powers, abuse of official powers, taking a bribe. ——————————— NW RF. 2011. N 44. Art. 6319.

Ruse expenses incurred in the case in the amount of up to BGN 00. 00 – remuneration paid for the property of persons and state duty on objectively related claims in the amount of 10 leva. The decision is subject to appeal to the District Court in the District Court of Rousset within 2 weeks after notification of the parties.

The Constitutional Court found that these decisions violated the applicant's fundamental right to protection of property. The unauthorized electricity surge was caused by the complainant's handling of the electricity meter. According to experts, it was determined that the seals on the meter were fakes and rolls of two code book traces were found that suggested forced rotation of the two dials.

3. In the commented article, a judicial act is recognized as unjust if it was passed in violation of procedural or substantive law, entailing its cancellation or modification (Articles 330, 387, 391.9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 389.15 - 389.18, 401.15, 412.9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) . At the same time, the fact that some judicial acts (in particular, decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation) cannot be reviewed within the framework of the country's existing judicial system does not exclude the possibility of bringing to criminal liability the persons who adopted them if they acted knowingly illegally. 4. The crime is recognized as completed from the moment when the corresponding judicial act becomes capable of generating legal consequences. Thus, a sentence or decision in a civil case begins to take effect from the moment it is announced in a court hearing, and it is from this moment that the actions of the judge, who decided it knowingly illegally, are recognized as a completed crime. The fact that the unjust decision has not yet entered into legal force, has not begun to be executed, or has been canceled or changed does not affect the recognition of the crime as completed. 5. The subjects of the crime are judges, as well as other persons involved in the administration of justice: arbitration judges and jurors. The fact that the verdict of the jury is not the final judicial act, since on its basis a verdict must still be rendered, which ends the criminal proceedings, cannot serve as a basis for excluding jurors from among the persons subject to responsibility for taking a deliberately unjust judicial act, since the verdict itself can give rise to significant legal consequences: declaring the defendant guilty or not guilty (in the latter case, the judge presiding at the court session is deprived of the opportunity to make any other decision other than an acquittal), recognition of the defendant as deserving of leniency, which entails the impossibility of assigning him a punishment exceeding 2/3 of the maximum term or the amount of the most severe punishment. 6. The subjective side of the crime in question is characterized only by direct intent, as evidenced by the reference in the article to the knowledge of the injustice of the judicial act. The issuance of an unjust verdict, decision, resolution or determination due to incomplete examination by the court of the evidence presented by the parties, incorrect assessment of the evidence or erroneous interpretation of the substantive law when qualifying the act or resolving a civil claim does not entail liability under the commented article, despite the fact that the result of such an act may be an unlawful conviction an innocent person or, conversely, acquittal of a criminal, imposition of significant material burdens on a person in connection with the satisfaction of a claim, etc. The goals and motives for issuing a deliberately unjust judicial act are not decisive for the qualification of the act under this article. 7. Qualifying circumstances for this crime are unlawful conviction by a court sentence to imprisonment or the occurrence of other grave consequences, which may include a serious illness of a person, attempted suicide, or significant material losses. Responsibility under Part 2 of the commented article also occurs in the case when a person does not want the occurrence of grave consequences, but deliberately allows them or is indifferent to them. That is, in relation to the consequences, guilt can be expressed in the form of not only direct, but also indirect intent, as well as negligence.

The reasoning of the Constitutional Court emphasized that damage in civil law acts as preventive compensation and the amount of damage cannot be fines for illegal consumption. With such a significant difference in the need for the general courts to make decisions based on some evidence that the applicant was indeed between an unauthorized person to take the amount of electricity consumed and thus suffered significant damage. If the evidence on which such a conclusion may be based is not available to the court, it cannot mechanically accept the amount of damages calculated solely in accordance with the provisions of the Energy Law Act.

Article 305. Issuance of a knowingly unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act

Commentary on Article 305

1. The direct object of the crime is the procedure for passing sentences, decisions and other judicial acts established by procedural acts. An additional direct object is the rights and legitimate interests of citizens or legal entities. The subject of the crime is an unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act. A verdict is a decision on the guilt or innocence of the defendant and the imposition of punishment on him or on his release from punishment, made by a court of first instance or appellate instance. A judgment is a judicial act in a civil case. Other judicial acts include rulings, decrees, and verdicts. Determination - any decision, with the exception of a sentence, made by a court of first instance collectively in criminal proceedings. Determinations are all decisions made by the court of second instance, with the exception of the court of appeal or supervisory authority, when reviewing the relevant court decision. A resolution is an act of the presidium of the court when reviewing sentences, rulings and decisions that have entered into legal force, as well as an act adopted by a single judge, with the exception of a sentence or decision in a civil case. A verdict is a decision made by a panel of jurors on the issues put before it, including the main question of the guilt or innocence of the defendant. The unfairness of a judicial act is a mandatory feature of the subject of the crime, which means that such acts were issued with a significant violation of the norms of substantive or procedural legislation and with a clear discrepancy between the conclusions of the court and the actual circumstances of the case. The unfairness of a judicial act can manifest itself, for example, in the conviction of an innocent person, the acquittal of a guilty person, in the consideration of a case with an illegal composition of the court, in the incorrect intentional classification of a crime, in the unreasonable refusal to consider a claim or in its unreasonable satisfaction, in the illegal collection of tax arrears from citizens etc. 2. The objective side of the crime is expressed in the commission of actions by the perpetrator in the form of a deliberately unjust sentence, decision or other judicial act, i.e. in the adoption by the court of an act that is incorrect from the point of view of the law regarding the issue under consideration. 3. The corpus delicti by design is formal. The crime is over from the moment all judges sign the unjust act. To recognize the crime as completed, the subsequent announcement of the judicial act does not matter. 4. The subject of the crime is special. They are: judges of any courts and units (except for the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, constitutional (statutory) courts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation). The subjects should include the judge, jury and arbitration assessors. If an unjust act is made by a court consisting of several members by prior conspiracy, their actions are qualified under Part 1 of the article in question, but the punishment is imposed taking into account paragraph “c” of Part 1 of Art. 63 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - committing a crime as part of a group of persons by prior conspiracy or an organized group. 5. The subjective side of the crime is characterized by guilt in the form of direct intent. Direct intent is evidenced by an indication of the deliberate unfairness of the judicial act. The motives for the crime can be different and do not affect the qualifications. Professional errors caused by insufficient competence of court members, negligence, etc., are not grounds for criminal prosecution under Art. 305 CC. 6. Part 2 of Art. 305 of the Criminal Code provides for two qualifying criteria: 1) imposition of an illegal sentence of imprisonment, which should be understood as imprisonment for a certain period or life imprisonment; or 2) the onset of grave consequences, which may include the suicide of a convicted person, the infliction of large property damage, the acquittal of a dangerous criminal, the actual serving of a long term by an illegally convicted person, etc. In this case, the corpus delicti is formal and material.

If the applicant is forced, without any evidence of actual damage caused by the consumption of electricity, to pay eight to eleven times the amount they paid for previous periods, it places a disproportionate and excessive burden on him in violation of his right to protection of property. The Constitutional Court, in its decision rested and the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court of the Plenum, although does not cancel the decree, according to which the amount of damage for illegally consumed energy is calculated, but emphasized that ordinary courts in justified cases are not one-time to accept the calculation method, based on maternity leave.

Byzantine Alexey S.

2012-11-25T16:28:38+04:00 , 16:28 Unfair court decisions, signs of unfair decisions

Justice in civil cases is carried out on the basis of adversarialism and equality of the parties (Article 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). Adversarialism, by definition, produces winners and losers in court. The latter generate dissatisfaction with the court and the judicial system in general.

The Constitutional Court also tried to provide some instructions to the general courts on how to make a constitutional decision on damages from unauthorized consumption of electricity. If the defendant client proves that the damages calculated for the unauthorized seizure of electricity by implementing the provisions of Article 51 of the Energy Law are many times higher than the payment for electricity in the comparable periods from the unauthorized collection, ordinary courts cannot mechanically apply the relevant decree.

It is then that the plaintiff electricity supplier demonstrates a certain degree of probability that such quantity of electricity was actually withdrawn and that such damage was suffered. If the plaintiff fails to do this, the amount of damages must be determined by the court at the discretion of the individual. In this consideration, the courts will take into account all circumstances that can come as close as possible to determining the actual amount of damage caused. These accounts of the specific circumstances of each specific case may be experience, knowledge or parallel ongoing criminal proceedings against pests, information devices at the food point, information on consumption levels at a given time before and after unauthorized consumption, etc.

Anything can happen in court hearings, the opposite party may present a forged document to the court, the judge may be more sympathetic to one of the parties, laws can be unfair under certain circumstances. It also happens that the one who lies the most competently in a court hearing wins. However, all this is determined by the presence of competitiveness of the parties. Here we can speak in terms of sports competitions about “dirty tricks” and about playing “on the verge of a foul”. Most often, troubles in court await newcomers and plaintiffs who are self-confident in their rightness.

“If the legal process is much simpler, you can expect that in many cases this will not happen, because the Ministry of Justice will provide voluntary compensation,” says lawyer Jan Kaszprik. The head he spent four months in slavery. But it turned out that he did not give in to the race, because the lieutenant was lying down.

People are no longer afraid to speak up, lawyers say

At least in terms of damage. This is definitely a decisive shift, Kashprik adds. Big money will only be given to those recruited for damages. However, he missed it a year later. Currently, judges are not only responsible for the damaging rebuke, but also for 291 days of inappropriate communications.

The everyday concept of “unjust court decision”, “unfair court”, apparently, should mean a court decision that denied a party the right to the truth. Surely, there are other versions of the emergence of this concept of injustice. Common to all versions is the source of “misfortune”, which is the judge - corrupt, bought, illiterate, just a scoundrel. Oddly enough, the state authorities are satisfied with this state of affairs when the dissatisfaction of the losing party is directed at the judge. This is also beneficial for businessmen who feed near the ships. This is beneficial because it is easier to catch fish in “troubled waters”, otherwise real injustice will be committed.

I hope that the media that is around the Supreme Court decision and all the cases will help the people and they will not be afraid to petition the state, and if the state breaks its law, it cannot be held accountable,” Coin said.

Coin believes a High Court recommendation from the Supreme Court could help. The Ministry awarded us 500 crowns per day, which is the minimum, and we can continue with the next hearing, so let's see how much the court will give us. According to the President of the Union of Judges, Tom Thiessen Personal opinion from the Supreme Court leads to faster decision-making by judges. The Supreme Court must consolidate case law.

In this topic, I will share an observation about how unjust court decisions differ from legal and fair ones. The Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation contains articles that clearly indicate the inadmissibility of certain court actions that determine the reversal of the decision of the court of first instance. In addition, there are requirements for the statement of claim, which determine the refusal to accept the application for proceedings in court. I will not list the articles of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and all the circumstances that may determine the reversal of a court decision, but I will only note that unjust decisions must contain violations of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, on the basis of which the court of second instance can cancel the court decision. Or it may not be canceled - it’s all at the discretion of the court. But if the court of second instance overturns an unjust decision, it is precisely on the basis of a violation of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation by the court of first instance. Why this is so, I think it is clear, so that there is no cancellation of a court decision on the merits of a case in which an unjust court decision was made. For a general understanding of what shortcomings in the court’s decision are being discussed; these may be errors in the names of the parties, the name of the law that the court applied was incorrectly indicated, the judge was replaced, and the case was not heard first, and the like. However, the cases of the judiciary of the Russian Federation themselves will tell about all this better.

Soldiers' mistakes last year amounted to less than 102 million crowns

The Department of Justice remains behind the assessment of the future.
It is impossible to estimate the impact of the Supreme Court decision on the state budget, and it will always be logical to consider how many bailiffs will seek compensation for unlawful detention in a given year, Paleyk said. The resort cannot say exactly how many years it costs to damage unlawful detention. “We only have information about general damages assessed under the law on liability for damages caused by the exercise of public power by decision or improper administrative procedure,” Paleyk added. Last year alone it was less than 102 million crowns. One million a month ago.

Byzantine Alexey S.

2012-11-25T16:28:38+04:00 , 20:09 About how a citizen judges the authorities

I will start with the option of an unjust decision, the analogues of which, as a rule, are upheld (approved) by the court of second instance. This option is often found in courts where the defendant is the government. The essence of a judge’s fraud (I call the actions of a judge a generally accepted concept) is that a citizen files a claim against the defendant, and the court leaves the citizen’s application without consideration on the merits. An analogue to this is the unsubscribe from an official to whom a citizen has addressed requests, but the unsubscribe can be corrected and challenged, and a court decision that has entered into legal force is almost impossible to cancel.

In connection with illegal detention last year, the ministry received 112 requests, out of court, 34 of them. This number also includes those seeking, for example, damages for loss of earnings or injury to health or personal rights. However, the Supreme Court's recommendation does not apply to them.

The group of people who were in custody and the trial that was later cleared of the charges is quite small, lawyers said. “I would guess that about 10 percent of criminal cases should be released,” Kashprik says. However, attorneys are likely to represent people who are responsible for injunctions.

I’ve finished with the explanations, and I’ll move on to presenting an example of an unjust decision. From the background. The administration of the clinic falsified the fact that a disabled person did not show up for an appointment with a doctor, on the basis of which a retroactive note was made on the sick leave certificate about a violation of the outpatient regime. The employer, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, having received a sick leave certificate for registration, immediately fired the disabled person for absenteeism. The Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation considered the failure of a disabled person to appear at the doctor’s office as absenteeism. I didn’t make a seal, the disabled person wasn’t discharged from work, which means he couldn’t take time off, and he only violated the fact that he didn’t show up to the doctor. In fact, the disabled person not only had an appointment with a doctor, but that day he was also provided with prompt medical services. For these services and for the doctor’s appointment, the patient’s insurer paid the clinic.

The disabled person applied to the court to cancel the dismissal order. The statement of claim made no mention of the doctors falsifying violations of the outpatient regime. The plaintiff challenged the legality of the dismissal order itself. In his arguments, the plaintiff pointed out that the Labor Code of the Russian Federation contains a limited list of grounds for dismissal at the initiative of the employer, and failure to appear for a doctor’s appointment is not grounds for dismissal. The representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation (defendant) demanded that the judge dismiss the disabled person. He demanded, and did not object to, the claim of a disabled employee. In another way, one government reminded the other how it should treat the interests of the branches of government.

At a court hearing on a labor dispute about reinstatement, a prosecutor must be present to verify the legality of the dismissal (I wrote this for information). The Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation has established a period for consideration of such cases - 1 month. One court hearing would have been enough, since it is simply impossible to fire someone for failure to appear at a doctor’s appointment; nevertheless, the trial in the court of first instance lasted six months. For obvious reasons, the court could not take so long to consider the legality of dismissal for failure to appear at the doctor’s office, which essentially required a formal court decision in favor of the employee, but the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation had to dismiss the disabled person. Otherwise, the “sentence” of the disabled person was passed by the state represented by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, and the court should have legalized the dismissal. This action took the judge and prosecutor six months. The result of the work of the lawyers was a decision on behalf of the Russian Federation, according to which the judge and the prosecutor found that the disabled person did not go to work after his dismissal; for this violation, the court fired the disabled person and recognized its own dismissal as legal. And again, I didn’t wet myself, the judge and the prosecutor gave themselves the rights of an employer and fired me for absenteeism, and then recognized their dismissal as legal. Let me briefly explain what the prosecutor and the judge did on behalf of the Russian Federation. Dismissal at the initiative of the employer is carried out in compliance with the procedure defined in the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. In particular, the employer is obliged to take an explanatory note regarding the violation of labor discipline (absenteeism) and only after that impose a disciplinary sanction. The employer with whom the employee has an employment contract has the right to impose a disciplinary sanction and dismissal. Only relations between an employee and an employer are built on the basis of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The disabled person did not have an employment relationship with the judge and the prosecutor, and they did not have the right to dismiss the disabled person, whose employer was the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. There is arbitrariness of the judge and prosecutor, which qualifies as a criminal offense.

Thus, the court's decision was not made on the merits of the case. The claim for illegal dismissal remained unconsidered. It is practically impossible to appeal such a court decision, since the crime was committed by the judge and the prosecutor and they must be dealt with by the investigative authorities, after which, according to the procedural order, the court decision can be reviewed based on newly discovered circumstances.

In this example, the decision of the trial court was overturned. Apparently, the scales of justice tipped in favor of the disabled person because by that time he had evidence that the doctors had falsified his failure to appear at the doctor’s appointment. In this light, the actions of the judge and the prosecutor, who did not consider in court the legality of the order to dismiss on the basis of failure to appear at the doctor, looked like concealment of falsification of documents by the administration of the clinic. I believe that you will agree with my conclusion, since it is impossible for a citizen to resist the authorities, especially when the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the prosecutor's office and the court are against the citizen, and there is actually no one to complain to.

And so the plaintiff won a victory in court over the entire kingdom-state. Precisely a victory, because it was not a trial, it was a meeting of representatives of all branches of government (executive - in absentia). The prosecutor's office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and the judiciary demonstrated in this court case that laws apply only to citizens. The government of criminals tried a citizen who acted according to the law by going to court to protect his constitutional rights.

The trial for reinstatement lasted more than a year. All this time the plaintiff did not work, and he was supposed to pay compensation for forced absence. In fact, the blame for the fact that the trial lasted so long is a consequence of the violation of the rule of law by those who protect the rule of law.

You can read the decision of the court of first instance with the participation of the prosecutor, which I wrote about above, in the topic

Byzantine Alexey S.

2012-11-25T16:28:38+04:00 , 23:57 The judge is “suicidal.”

I believe that many have observed this phenomenon - the court of second instance overturned the decision of the court of the first and sent it for review, - the court of first instance in a new composition made the same decision as the canceled one - after which the court of second instance upheld the court's decision. At the same time, the parties have so many emotions that they do not see and do not want to understand the essence of what is happening, and when the court’s decision is overpowered, emotions completely take over the mind. Meanwhile, everything that happened had nothing to do with justice; the court solved its problems.

Further, the court removes the prosecutor from participating in the trial. The court decision, which I wrote about in a previous post, was overturned by the court of second instance. The same court, but with a different composition, decided that the dismissal order was illegal. The disabled person was reinstated at work. All that remains is to compensate the employee for forced absence and moral damages. These claims for compensation are also considered in court, but without a prosecutor. Well, not entirely without a prosecutor, but simply that his presence is not necessary.

At the same time, claims for compensation for forced absence are included in the statement of claim along with a request for reinstatement at work. Therefore, the court is obliged to consider all claims in one hearing. Accordingly, the prosecutor who appeared to establish the legality of the dismissal is present when considering the claim for monetary compensation. This circumstance will determine the further actions of the judge.

The plaintiff, when making a claim for compensation, must prove the amount of the amount recovered and make a calculation. That was done. However, the judge did not agree with the plaintiff’s calculations and made his own calculation. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the defendant did not react in any way to the plaintiff’s calculations, that is, he did not object, well, or did not interfere in the process.

As a result of his calculations, the judge reduced the amount of compensation collected for forced absence by seven times. That is, the discrepancy was not in rubles, but by several times. It is obvious that the amount of compensation was not determined by the judge, and this amount was agreed upon with the defendant. That is, the final court decision should not contain the amount calculated by the plaintiff, but the amount “calculated” by the judge. Consequently, the judge needs to make an unjust decision in order for his decision to be canceled, but not because of the calculations made by him, but on another basis - a violation of the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, which I wrote about at the beginning of the topic. A natural question arises: why did the judge need this, if there is an assumption of an agreement and the court of second instance simply does not dare to interfere in the financial affairs of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. The judge had two problems. First, the plaintiff will appeal the court's decision and must have the complaint rejected, while the decision of the first instance court was not based on the case materials, that is, it was unjust. The second problem is that the prosecutor was present at the court hearing, and at that time he had the right, in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, to appeal the court decision. Otherwise, the prosecutor turned out to be an accomplice in the unjust decision. Thus, the court’s decision regarding monetary compensation should have been overturned in the court of second instance and the case sent for review, in order to then enforce a similar decision from the new court, but without the participation of the prosecutor.

If the court decision had not been appealed by the plaintiff, then there would have been no continuation of the unfair trials in this court case. But the plaintiff filed a complaint, then the judge, on his own initiative, schedules a court hearing to correct arithmetic errors in the court decision. This is the kind of judge who calculated it himself, found his own mistakes - he did everything himself, he doesn’t need either a plaintiff or a defendant. And then the following happened. There was no correction of arithmetic errors - the court hearing was declared as a correction of arithmetic errors, but the judge completely changes his own calculations in the court decision, making additional changes to the court decision, which is unacceptable according to the norms of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. Thus, the judge predetermined the reversal of the court decision precisely on the basis of violation of the norms of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, and not on the merits of his calculations, the error of which was pointed out by the plaintiff in the appeal.

And so it happened. The court's decision regarding the recovery of compensation for forced absence was canceled due to the judge's violation of the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. The court case was sent again to the court of first instance for review of the case by a different composition of judges. A “different composition of the court” without a prosecutor made the same decision on the amount of the amount collected for forced absence as the previous court, whose decision was overturned by the court of second instance, the plaintiff’s complaint was left unsatisfied, and the decision of the court of first instance entered into legal force.

Further, the court demonstrates its attitude to what the authorities in Russia call a judicial decision on behalf of the Russian Federation. * You can read the “suicide” judge’s decision and other court decisions in the topic

Byzantine Alexey S.

2012-11-25T16:28:38+04:00 , 22:09 The judge is lawless

As planned by the judge of the first instance, his decision was overturned by the court of second instance in terms of compensation for forced absenteeism due to a violation of the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. The decision of the court of first instance in favor of the plaintiff regarding the cancellation of illegal dismissal entered into legal force.

The court of first instance remains to meet again to formally resolve the issue of the amount of monetary compensation for forced absence, namely, to repeat the calculation of the amount recovered from the canceled court decision by the court of second instance. The violations of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation were eliminated, and this time the court of second instance no longer objected to the same calculations of average earnings that the last time sent for review. However, at the last stage, not everything went so smoothly for the court in implementing what was planned. The magistrate made his decision between the same parties on the issue of average earnings. The decision of the magistrate entered into legal force before the hearing of the case in the district court on the amount of compensation for forced absence.

Upon dismissal, the employer, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, made an incorrect final calculation. At that time, magistrates considered labor disputes regarding monetary payments, and after the trial that I am writing about, all labor disputes began to be considered in the district court.

Where to file complaints against the actions or inaction of judges

Such appeals are submitted to the chairman of the staff of the court where the proceedings took place or are taking place. It is the chairman who is authorized at the initial stage to assess the legality of the actions of his subordinates (Article 35 of the Federal Law No. 1 “On courts of general jurisdiction in the Russian Federation”). Only after he has considered the complaint and made an appropriate submission can the appeal be considered:

Council of Judges.
Qualification Board (QCC).
High Council of Justice.

When submitting an appeal to the chairman, it is necessary to take into account important circumstances. For example, it is practically useless to complain about a judge before a decision has been made on the case. Such statements are often seen as a means of pressure and an attempt to interfere with justice.

The victim’s complaint must show the inconsistency of the judge’s actions with the Code of Judicial Ethics, which fall under the provisions of Art. 12.1 Federal Law-3132-1 (disciplinary liability). For example, disrespectful attitude towards participants in the process, violation of procedural deadlines, etc.

The illegality of the decision should not be mentioned in the appeal. There is a special procedure for appealing it in other instances. Chairmen of courts, the Collegium and the Council of Judges do not consider such applications.

The legislative framework

To achieve a review of a previously made decision, one should rely on the following legislative acts:

Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation dated December 18, 2001. N 174-FZ (as amended on July 31, 2020).
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation dated June 13, 1996. N 63-FZ (as amended on July 31, 2020).
Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses dated December 30, 2001. N 195-FZ (as amended on July 31, 2020) (as amended on August 11, 2020).
Constitution of the Russian Federation (adopted by popular vote on December 12, 1993, with amendments approved during the all-Russian vote on July 1, 2020).
Review of judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 2 (2020) (approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on July 22, 2020).

How to write an application correctly

The document does not have strict rules for filling out, however, during the writing process you must adhere to an official business style and the following recommendations:

A cap indicating the name of the body, the full name of the chairman and the personal data of the applicant is written in the upper right corner.
The type of document that is being drawn up must be indicated: “Complaint”, “Appeal”, “Application”.
The main part reflects all the circumstances of violations by the Themis employee, indicates the legal norms violated during the consideration of the case, and reflects the victim’s request to take disciplinary measures against the violator.
The written document is signed by the applicant and the current date is indicated.

The prepared appeal must be supported by evidence. These may be other documents, audio, video files and other materials confirming the illegality of the judge’s actions. The package is sent to the device in one of the following ways:

Transfer of documents to the office.
Sent by registered mail or courier delivery.
Presentation of the appeal during a personal reception with the chairman.

If the complaint is considered by the Collegium, then it is impossible to challenge its decision. This procedure is not provided for by law.

Question answer

Question: Is it possible for the victim to have his sentence commuted at the request of the victim? We are talking about the theft of a wallet containing a large amount of funds. The police were able to quickly detain the criminal, and he returned all the money. Where should I go for this, and how to act in such a situation?

Answer: The opinion of the victim will be taken into account by the court when considering the case. Therefore, it is important to appear at the court hearing to state your position and justify your demands. But if the case is still under consideration, you can contact the investigator with a written request to terminate the criminal proceedings. Perhaps, taking into account other circumstances, the case will be closed due to the absence of a crime (if the money was returned in full).

Question: An ex-wife, who has not been involved in the child’s life for a long time, committed an unlawful act and was sentenced to 5 years. But the appellate court reduced the period of detention in a correctional institution, based on the fact that she allegedly had a young child in her care. Is it possible to challenge such a decision?

Answer: Only the prosecutor has the right to appeal against increased punishment. Any other person cannot file such a claim in court. At the same time, if the convicted woman has not been deprived of parental rights, the use of this article to mitigate the punishment is completely legal and legitimate.

Question: Can the appellate court impose a different sentence based on the same materials and evidence?

Answer: The appellate authority has the right to re-examine the evidence and materials provided in order to change the type of punishment. Based on the results of the consideration of the case, she may make a different decision, which is not a violation of the law.

Question: How realistic is it to achieve a reduction in the period of detention due to theft of someone else’s property if the crime was committed by a group of people and the accused already has a suspended sentence?

Answer: In such circumstances, the only way to avoid severe punishment is to return the embezzled property and write a confession.

Procedure for considering a complaint

The current legislation does not define clear deadlines for making decisions on complaints filed against judges. During the review process, the Chairman of the Staff or the Board may refer to Art. 6.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation on the reasonableness of the timing of legal proceedings and the issuance of court decisions. The concept includes many criteria, including the factual and legal complexity of the case, the behavior of all participants in the process, the sufficiency and effectiveness of the court’s actions, etc., which must be taken into account for an objective consideration of the case. In practice, the processing time for an application can range from several days to several months.

The received complaint is registered in the office and transferred to the chairman. He considers the appeal and, based on the results of the inspection, prepares appropriate representations, which are executed on the spot or sent to the Disciplinary Commission of the Collegium. Based on the results of the investigation, the commission prepares a conclusion. If the document confirms the facts stated in the complaint, the guilty representative of Themis is subject to disciplinary action.

Where to complain about the servant of Themis of the district, magistrate and arbitration court?

There is a clear hierarchy in the judicial system, so you need to appeal against the actions of a judge strictly to the body authorized to make a decision. You can file a complaint against a magistrate or district judge with the chairman of the court. It is he who controls the district judges and the areas of justices of the peace assigned to him. The arbitration court also has its own chairman, to whom claims can be made regarding the actions of the arbitration judge.

Important! It is worth understanding that appealing a decision in a trial and filing a complaint against a judge are completely different applications.

Chairman

The legislation provides that the qualification judicial board can evaluate the actions of its colleague only upon the presentation of the chairman of the court about a violation. That is, the first step in recognizing a judge’s actions as unlawful is a direct appeal to the chairman of the court. When an application is received, the chairman is obliged to check the facts stated in the appeal, evaluate the actions of the subordinate, and present his decision to the commission for discussion.

You can submit reports of violations not only to the chairman of the court himself, but also to the regional collegium, which itself will forward the document for “local” proceedings. There are cases that when a complaint is received, a panel immediately forms a commission, which necessarily includes the chairman of the court.

The Chairman as an authorized person has the right:

check the discipline or establish facts of violation of the law of a subordinate judge with the consent of the collegium to these actions;
report the results of the checks carried out for an objective consideration by the commission of the received appeal.

The receipt of a complaint against a judge is not grounds for his removal from office. The basis for termination of powers in accordance with clause 2 of Art. 22 of the Federal Law of March 14, 2002 N 30-FZ “On the Bodies of the Judicial Community in the Russian Federation” can only be a decision of the qualification commission, which verified the activities of the judge who committed the misconduct.

Qualification Board

If the received complaint about unlawful actions of a judge is objective, then the chairman of the court is obliged to contact the panel of judges. The competence of this authority includes the consideration of complaints about the inaction (action) of judges. If the submission is legal, only this body has the right to impose a disciplinary sanction on the violator.

After receiving a report of a violation from the chairman of the court, the regional collegium forms a commission to more thoroughly examine the activities of its colleague, based on the results of which a decision will be made to terminate powers or impose an administrative penalty.

Attention! The qualification board has the right to consider complaints only after considering an appeal to the chairman of the court.

Illegal actions of the court chairman can be appealed directly to the regional qualification board.

Higher KKS

This authority does not have the authority to control the activities of judges; accordingly, it does not have the right to consider complaints received against the servants of Themis. If the applicant asks to check the actions of the judge, the HQCC will refuse due to incompetence. A judicial body that has received instructions from the Higher Qualification Committee has the right to evaluate the actions of a judge, give an expert assessment, and draw up a final report.

The Higher KKS has the authority to hear the final report, based on evidence of violations of legal norms, and make a decision on removal from office or imposition of penalties.

In order for a judge to bear criminal liability, the appeal must be sent to the Investigative Committee, which, with the consent of the Higher Qualification Committee or the regional qualification board, has the right to make a decision regarding the initiation of criminal proceedings.

You can contact VKKS in the following cases:

if there is a problem with the chairman of the federal court;
if injustice arose in a military court;
if you need to appeal the decision of the qualification board.

Submitting a complaint to the President of the Russian Federation

Who else is authorized to receive complaints to the court? According to the law, judges are confirmed to positions on the basis of decrees issued by the President of the Russian Federation. The head of state has indirect powers to resolve certain problematic issues in the judicial structure and in the work of judges.

Complaints to the president about unlawful actions of justice officials are submitted online. Appeals are sent to the Office of the President, which is responsible for working with appeals from individuals. and legal persons

The basis for sending a complaint to the President about the unlawful activity of a judge is a separate Federal Law “On the procedure for considering appeals from citizens of the Russian Federation.”

Please note! To send an electronic complaint, you need to go to https://letters.kremlin.ru/letters/send and follow these steps:

indicate your full name;
write your contact number and email address. mail;
clearly indicate to whom complaints are addressed (the head of state, his administration, an official of such an administration);
compose the text part of the appeal - to do this, state in a brief narrative form the essence of the violation that occurred and its consequences;
to support your arguments, take care of the evidence base - attach the necessary files (files of any content are considered: video, audio, text, but subject to placement in one file up to 10 MB);
click on send letter.

The letter has been sent. Once sent, the appeal is registered within three days from the time of its acceptance. The response is drawn up by administration employees - the law allocates a week for this.

Watch the video. Where to complain about a judge and is it possible to do this:

Can consideration be refused?

A separate article 27 of the Regulations on the operating procedure of the CJC (collegium of judges) states that the complaint must be returned to the citizen who filed it in the following cases:

the document contains data on the judge’s violation of disciplinary norms;
the essence of the submitted appeal boils down to the applicant’s disagreement with the act issued by the court;
the complaint uses obscene statements, offensive phrases and words considered threatening;
the text part of the document cannot be read;
a response has already been provided to the essence of the complaint under consideration;
decisions on the issue submitted for consideration cannot be made by a panel of judges.

Also, the board will not consider impersonal applications that do not contain information about the applicant - his address details, full name.

Attention!

What actions of a judge can you complain about?

When stipulating how to punish a judge, it should be noted that this can only be done for significant violations. By significant we mean violations of fundamental human rights enshrined in the Constitution. For example, if a judge unreasonably postpones the hearing of a case several times in a row, then we can say that from a formal point of view, these are violations of specific procedural norms, and in relation to a specific person (a person involved in the process), this is a violation of the right to access to justice.

Violations for which officials must be punished can be divided into procedural and corruption. Of course, corruption violations by Themis employees are of more interest to law enforcement agencies and journalists, but as for ordinary citizens, they are more interested in the procedural type of violations. In turn, procedural violations may be associated with a violation of the right to a fair trial and a violation of the right to personal integrity. A judge faces liability for the following offenses:

Leaving the application without progress or returning it without compelling reasons. Quite often, lawyers are faced with situations in which the leading economic courts pay great attention to formalities, check the correctness of the application and its compliance with the requirements of the law, while finding fault with unimportant facts. So, for example, if a check for the payment of state duties does not indicate a code correctly, but the money went to the state treasury, the judge does not have the right to dismiss or reject the claim.
Violations of jurisdiction to consider cases. A judge can be dismissed for violating his oath if he considers cases in another region or cases that he cannot decide. For example, the Vladivostok court cannot consider disputes about the ownership of land plots located on the territory of Rostov. Or decisions about property issues cannot be made by a magistrate.
Not considering the motion or evidence. Failure to consider a petition or evidence in a timely manner can significantly affect the outcome of the case, because the subject of the dispute may be destroyed or lose its value during this time.
Unreasonable suspension of judicial proceedings. This situation occurs very often, judges postpone consideration of one case until consideration of another, which may not be related to the main dispute. At the same time, nothing prevents them from merging two cases into one if the subject of the dispute is the same and the persons involved are the same.
Acceptance of a counterclaim without grounds. It is not uncommon for a judge to take into account counterclaims, which, in fact, have no significance, in order to deliberately delay the legal proceedings in the interests of the defendant.

It is possible to hold Themis employees accountable if they assign long intervals between consideration of a case. According to the Constitution, every person has the right to a timely trial. It is also illegal to delay the issuance of a court order after a decision has been made. A judge does not have the right to bring a person to administrative and civil liability without reason, or to prescribe unjustified preventive measures. There are many violations that occur in legal proceedings, the main thing is to find confirmation of this violation in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

When drawing up a document - a complaint, it is necessary to take into account that today the judiciary is very busy, and if your case is not considered for a long time or is postponed, this does not indicate the bias of the judge. If you are dissatisfied with the decision made, then you can always appeal it by filing an appeal. A judge who, in your opinion, is acting incorrectly, can be removed if the consideration of the case has not yet been completed.