The state Duma adopted in the first reading amendments to the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation, which reduce the period of detention of entrepreneurs, if their criminal case is not made active investigations.
Initiated a bill to the Supreme court of Russia, пишетLegal.Report.
They noted that often in judicial practice on criminal cases about crimes in sphere of economic activities, there are cases when entrepreneurs simultaneously deemed to be committing other more serious crimes. In this case, entrepreneurs are not subject to the additional substantive and procedural guarantees of ensuring the rights and legitimate interests of businessmen.
Amendments of the armed forces, specify the text of part 1.1 of article 108 of the criminal procedure code subject to the provisions of the act of July 3, 2016 No. 323-FZ, providing for the addition of article 159 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation parts 5-7 of responsibility for fraud, combined with the deliberate failure to contractual obligations in the field of entrepreneurship.
Specified, to whom exactly set apply this rule guarantees in the case of committing crimes, envisaged by parts 1-4 of article 159, articles 159.1 – 159.3, 159.5, 159.6, 160, 165 of the criminal code. To such persons it is proposed to refer the suspects accused of these crimes, if committed by a private entrepreneur in connection with the implementation of its business activities or the management of its property, used for entrepreneurial activities, or where the offence is committed by a member of the management body of the commercial organization in connection with the exercise of powers for the management of the organization or in connection with the implementation of a commercial organization entrepreneurial or other economic activities.
It is also proposed to state in new edition rule contained in part 8 of article 109 of the CCP, regulating the requirements to the regulation on applying the preliminary investigation on the extension of the detention period, as well as the actions of the judge in the consideration of such petitions. Under the bill, the decision to initiate the petition must state the grounds and reasons of the extension of the detention period. If one of the motives is the need of investigative and other actions under the CPC, the resolution must specify the list of these actions and the reasons why they have not been produced in previously established terms of detention, and information about the work of investigative and other actions in the period after the preventive measure or of the last renewal of his detention.
In case of refusal to satisfy the petition of the judge on his own initiative has the right if there is reason to elect against the accused preventive measure in the form of pledge or house arrest.