Book contents
- A Sociology of Justice in Russia
- Cambridge Studies in Law and Society
- A Sociology of Justice in Russia
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Chapter One Introduction
- Chapter Two The Professionalisation of Law in the Context of the Russian Legal Tradition
- Chapter Three To Go to Court or Not? The Evolution of Disputes in Russia
- Chapter Four The Everyday Experiences of Russian Citizens in Justice of the Peace Courts
- Chapter Five In Search of Justice
- Chapter Six When Business Goes to Court
- Chapter Seven Journalists, Judges and State Officials
- Chapter Eight Accusatorial Bias in Russian Criminal Justice
- Chapter Nine Decision-Making in the Russian Criminal Justice System
- Chapter Ten The Richelieu Effect
- Chapter Eleven Administerial Justice
- Index
- Cambridge Studies in Law and Society
- References
Chapter Nine - Decision-Making in the Russian Criminal Justice System
Investigators, Procurators, Judges and Human Trafficking Cases
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 June 2018
Book contents
- A Sociology of Justice in Russia
- Cambridge Studies in Law and Society
- A Sociology of Justice in Russia
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Chapter One Introduction
- Chapter Two The Professionalisation of Law in the Context of the Russian Legal Tradition
- Chapter Three To Go to Court or Not? The Evolution of Disputes in Russia
- Chapter Four The Everyday Experiences of Russian Citizens in Justice of the Peace Courts
- Chapter Five In Search of Justice
- Chapter Six When Business Goes to Court
- Chapter Seven Journalists, Judges and State Officials
- Chapter Eight Accusatorial Bias in Russian Criminal Justice
- Chapter Nine Decision-Making in the Russian Criminal Justice System
- Chapter Ten The Richelieu Effect
- Chapter Eleven Administerial Justice
- Index
- Cambridge Studies in Law and Society
- References
Summary
The decision-making that occurs in the Russian criminal justice system is often obscured by a strict emphasis on legal positivism when talking to its participants. The decision of what crime to charge an offender with is painted as a cut-and-dry formula: if the evidence matches the elements of the crime as defined in the code, the charge should be clear. However, in Russia, as in many other legal systems, investigators and prosecutors have a significant amount of discretion in their charging decisions. Human trafficking laws, which were introduced into the Russian Criminal Code in 2003, are one of those instances. This chapter uses evidence from over 100 cases of human trafficking to explore how these decision-making processes play out in reality. Initially, prosecutors seemed willing to pursue trafficking charges more aggressively using the highest aggravating factors in the criminal code article, but over time they seem to have modified their charging practices as the courts proved to be largely unreceptive to these claims. This chapter uses the case study of human trafficking laws to discuss broader features of the Russian justice system such as the evident inertia of the courts when faced with new laws or new types of case.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- A Sociology of Justice in Russia , pp. 205 - 230Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Albonetti, C. A. (1987) ‘Prosecutorial discretion: the effects of uncertainty’, Law and Society Review, 21(2): 291–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, E. A., Berk, R. A. and Hamner, K. M. (1996) ‘Motivated by hatred or prejudice: categorization of hate-motivated crimes in two police divisions’, Law and Society Review, 30(4): 819–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, S. (2014) The German Prosecution Service: Guardians of the Law? New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyne, S. (2010) ‘Uncertainty and the search for truth at trial: defining prosecutorial ‘objectivity’ in German sexual assault cases’, Washington and Lee Law Review, 67(4): 1287–1360.Google Scholar
Efimov, V. (2006) ‘U sosedei devki slashche?’, Kur’er Belomor’ia, 11 July. www.arhpress.ru/kurbel/2006/7/11/15.shtml.Google Scholar
Erokhina, L. and Buryak, M. (2003) Torgovlya Zhenshchinami i Detmi v Sotsialnoi i Kriminologicheskoi Perspektive. Moscow: Profobrazovanie.Google Scholar
Eterno, J. A. and Silverman, E. B. (2012) The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation. New York: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Farrell, A., Owens, C. and McDevitt, J. (2014) ‘New laws but few cases: understanding the challenges to the investigation and prosecution of human trafficking cases’, Crime, Law and Social Change, 61(2): 139–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faull, A. (2016) ‘Measured governance? Policing and performance management in South Africa’, Public Administration and Development, 36(2): 157–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frohmann, L. (1991) ‘Discrediting victims’ allegations of sexual assault: prosecutorial accounts of case rejections’, Social Problems, 38(2): 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granville, J. (2004) ‘From Russia without love: the “fourth wave” of human trafficking’, Demokratizatsiya, 12(1): 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, D. (2000) ‘The Natasha trade: the transnational shadow market of trafficking in women’, Journal of International Affairs, 53(2): 625–651.Google Scholar
Iarotskaya, Z. and Glodeva, A. (2007) ‘Dvukh Kirovchan Obviniaiut v Ubiistvakh, Ispol’zovanii Rabskogo Truda i Vymogatel’stve’, Dvazhdy Dva, 11 April.Google Scholar
Jenness, V. (2007) ‘The emergence, content, and institutionalization of hate crime law: how a diverse policy community produced a modern legal fact’, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3: 141–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenness, V. and Grattet, R. (2005) ‘The law-in-between: the effects of organizational perviousness on the policing of hate crime’, Social Problems, 52(2): 337–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenness, V. and McPhail, B. (2005/6) ‘To charge or not to charge? That is the question: the pursuit of strategic advantage in prosecutorial decision-making surrounding hate crime’, Journal of Hate Studies, 4(1): 89–119.Google Scholar
Ma, Y. (2002) ‘Prosecutorial discretion and plea bargaining in the United States, France, Germany and Italy: a comparative perspective’, International Criminal Justice Review, 12(1): 22–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mastrofski, S. D. and Ritti, R. R. (1992) ‘You can lead a horse to water … : a case study of a police department’s response to stricter drunk-driving laws’, Justice Quarterly, 9(3): 465–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, L. A. (2015) Trafficking Justice: How Russian Police Enforce New Laws, from Crime to Courtroom. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, L. A. (2016) ‘Transaction costs: prosecuting child trafficking for illegal adoption in Russia’, Anti-Trafficking Review, 6: 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, W. F. (2014) ‘Explaining the under-performance of the anti-human-trafficking campaign: experience from the United States and Europe’, Crime, Law and Social Change, 61(2): 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, A. R., Heeren, T. and Hingson, R. (1987) ‘Cops and drivers: police discretion and the enforcement of Maine’s 1981 OUI law’, Journal of Criminal Justice, 15(5): 361–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyers, A. R., Heeren, T. and Hingson, R. (1989) ‘Discretionary leniency in police enforcement of laws against drinking and driving: two examples from the state of Maine, USA’, Journal of Criminal Justice,17(3): 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlova, A. V. (2004) ‘From social dislocation to human trafficking: the Russian case’, Problems of Post-Communism, 51(6): 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paneyakh, E. (2014) ‘Faking performance together: systems of performance evaluation in Russian enforcement agencies and production of bias and privilege’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 30(2–3): 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paneyakh, E., Pozdnyakov, M., Titaev, K., Chetverikova, I. and Shklyaruk, M. (2012) Pravookhranitel’naia deiatel’nost’ v Rossii: Struktura, Funktsionirovanie, Puti Reformirovaniia, Part I: Diagnostika Raboty pravookhranitel’nikh Organov RF i Vypolneniya Imi Politseiskoi Funktsii. St Petersburg: Research Institute for the Rule of Law.Google Scholar
Pozdnyakov, M. (2014) Kriterii Otsenki Kachestva Raboty Sudei i Distsiplinarnaia Otvetstvennost’. St Petersburg: Institut problem pravoprimeneniia pri Evropeiskom universitete v Sankt-Peterburg.Google Scholar
Robinson, A. (2000) ‘The effect of a domestic violence policy change on police officers’ schemata’, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27(5): 600–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, P. Jr (2007) ‘Informal practices in Russian justice: probing the limits of post-Soviet reform’, in Feldbrugge, F. (ed.) Russia, Europe and the Rule of Law. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, P. Jr (2015) ‘Post-Soviet criminal justice: the persistence of distorted neo-inquisitorialism’, Theoretical Criminology, 19(2): 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solopov, M. (2016) ‘Opravdatel’nyi Prigovor–Eto Kak Padaiushchaia Zvezda’, Mediazona, 10 May.Google Scholar
Spears, J. and Spohn, C. (1996) ‘The genuine victim and prosecutors’ charging decisions in sexual assault cases’, American Journal of Criminal Justice, 20(2): 183–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spohn, C. (2014) ‘The non-prosecution of human trafficking cases: an illustration of the challenges of implementing legal reform’, Crime, Law and Social Change, 61(2): 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spohn, C., Beichner, D. and Davis-Frenzel, E. (2001) ‘Prosecutorial justifications for sexual assault case rejection: guarding the gateway to justice’, Social Problems, 48(2): 206–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, M. (2011) ‘Prosecution of trafficking in human beings cases’, in Winterdyk, J., Perrin, B. and Reichel, P. (eds.) Human Trafficking: Exploring the International Nature, Concerns, and Complexities. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 153–180.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by