Table of Contents

Comparative Criminal Procedure

Comparative Criminal Procedure

Research Handbooks in Comparative Law series

Edited by Jacqueline E. Ross and Stephen C. Thaman

This Handbook presents innovative research that compares different criminal procedure systems by focusing on the mechanisms by which legal systems seek to avoid error, protect rights, ground their legitimacy, expand lay participation in the criminal process and develop alternatives to criminal trials, such as plea bargaining, as well as alternatives to the criminal process as a whole, such as intelligence operations. The criminal procedures examined in this book include those of the United States, Germany, France, Spain, Russia, India, Latin America, Taiwan and Japan, among others.

Chapter 13: Special investigative techniques in post-Soviet states: the divide between preventive policing and criminal investigation

Nikolai Kovalev and Stephen C. Thaman

Subjects: law - academic, comparative law, criminal law and justice

Extract

The fifteen independent republics which arose following the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union are fascinating subjects of research in the transition from non-democratic, authoritarian legal norms to those compatible with democracy, international human rights norms, and due process. In the past, we have explored the developments in this realm in the area of lay participation in the criminal trial in the form of juries or mixed courts (Kovalev, 2010; Thaman, 2007), plea bargaining and the turn to adversary procedure (Kovalev, 2010; Thaman, 2008b).In this chapter we focus on the approach taken by twelve of the post-Soviet republics, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan1 in regulating secret investigative measures, such as wiretapping, bugging, use of undercover operatives, sting operations, etc., which impact on protected human rights of the citizenry, especially the right to privacy. These measures, which we will call ‘special investigative techniques’ (SITs)2 have a long history in Russia and the Soviet Union, where they were and are still mostly known as ‘operative-investigative measures’ (operativno-rozysknye meropriiatiia). The Soviet approach also borrowed from the pre-revolutionary practices of the Russian Imperial criminal police (sysknaia politsiia) and political police (okhranka) (Zharov, 2010; Zharov and Sprishevskii, 2012: 9–12).

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information