The right to testify in the mother tongue

[Ермаков Константин]

The right to testify in the mother tongue.

Part 2 of the article 26 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation gives the right to the accused and the suspect to testify in his native language. He collected a large legislative base on this issue. These are the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. And Decisions of the ECHR. The decision of the Constitutional Court of Alanya SB and Bashkiria. As well as the provisions of the Convention on Human Rights and the Charter on Regional Languages and, of course, the Law "On the Languages of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, not to mention Article 47 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where this right is directly enshrined, but I can not break through local courts, including the regional one ( at the stage of appealing against the investigator’s actions and decisions in accordance with Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). Since this right is stated in all the listed acts as imperative, that is, executed without reservations, the last PVA even explicitly states that the court has an obligation to grant the accused such a right. And how can one abuse the right if it is constitutional? But for now, this wall of justice is not breaking through. I explain to them that I am not able to protect his rights, because I don’t understand what the accused is saying in his defense. In this case, the court must listen to him, and he has the right to testify. Because the practice of the RF Armed Forces on this issue is disappointing, I’m preparing an appeal to the President of the Russian Federation, the guarantor is still an interview or a round table with lawyers on the local TV channel, the video is accused of the Internet, and I’m addressing my president Ramzan Kadyrov (raises the issue of discrimination). Since the usual ways of filing complaints do not work and are blocked at all levels of the courts. I even found a ruling of the Constitutional Court. Where a person claimed that this norm of the Constitution does not work in criminal proceedings. There they wrote in response such terrible nonsense again that a person knew the Russian language like that it prevented him from speaking Russian. Colleagues! What is the speech about? Did this occur in practice, and are there any positive examples when this norm that did not work in our sophisticated courts worked. I understand that in our country, courts, being in the expression of the ex-judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.A. Flogging by the excretory system of law enforcement agencies, they put the Constitution on a long time and for a long time, but still, someone managed to overcome this so far deadlock situation.
While I came up with such a chip. Come to the investigator and submit him written petitions in the same non-Nashen language. According to the CPC, he is obliged to resolve them within three days. How will it get out, let's see.

 

[Ермаков Константин]

Part 2 of the article 26 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation gives the right to the accused and the suspect to testify in his native language. He collected a large legislative base on this issue. This and the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of. And Decisions of the ECHR. Decision of the Constitutional Court of Alanya SB and Bashkiria. As well as the provisions of the Convention on Human Rights and the Charter on Regional Languages and, of course, the Law "On the Languages of the Peoples of the Russian Federation, not to mention Article 47 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, where this right is directly enshrined, but I cannot break through local courts, including the regional one. All They are denied interrogations in the accused’s native language as follows: he has knowledge of the Russian language and therefore abuses the law, dragging out the investigation. I consider this to be completely wrong, since this right is stated in all the listed acts as imperative. without reservations. The last PVA even explicitly states that the court is obligated to grant the accused such a right. Yes, and how the right can be abused if it is constitutional. But so far this judicial wall has not broken through. I explain to them that I can’t defend his rights I’m able, because I don’t understand what the accused is saying in his defense, and the court is obliged to listen to him, and he has the right to testify. The issue is disappointing, I am preparing an appeal to the President of the Russian Federation, the guarantor is all the same, an interview or a round table with lawyers on the local TV channel, accused, respectively, of the Internet clip. Since the usual ways of filing complaints do not work and are blocked at all levels of the courts. I even found a ruling of the Constitutional Court. Where a person claimed that this norm of the Constitution does not work in criminal proceedings. There they wrote in response such terrible nonsense again that a person knew the Russian language like that it prevented him from speaking Russian. Colleagues! What is the speech about? Did this occur in practice, and are there any positive examples when this norm that did not work in our sophisticated courts worked. I understand that in our country, courts, being in the expression of the ex-judge of the Supreme Court S.A. Flogging by the excretory system of law enforcement agencies, they put the Constitution on a long time and for a long time, but still, someone managed to overcome this so far deadlock situation.
While I came up with such a chip. Come to the investigator and submit him written petitions in the same non-Nashen language. According to the CPC, he is obliged to resolve them within three days. How will it get out, let's see.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

In the Russian Federation, the official language is Russian ... it is the language of all paperwork, including criminal proceedings ... Thus, all documents (and the application is also a written document) should be submitted only in Russian .... Of course it can be " to duplicate "in another language (but this" double "must be certified by the submitter in the proper form (notarized with the participation of an interpreter) .... Regarding testimonies during judicial proceedings ... Of course, testimonies can be given in any language (with the participation of an interpreter ) .... But in this case, the Russian text in the interrogation record, certified by the same translator, is mandatory .... From my investigative practice, I can say that I had to interrogate a person of Caucasian nationality with the participation of an interpreter .... Also, a person who does not own Russian language after the completion of the criminal case should be provided for familiarization and the criminal case itself (translated with the participation of an interpreter) .... but this still does not exclude the conduct of proceedings in a criminal case only in Russian .... Something like this .... In addition, the translator is criminally liable for incorrect translation ...
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation Article 307. Obviously false testimony, conclusion of an expert, specialist or incorrect translation
(as amended by the Federal the law dated 08.12.2003 N 162-ФЗ)
(see text in previous edition)
the law dated 08.12.2003 N 162-ФЗ)
(see text in previous edition)
N 162-FZ from 12/07/2011 N 420-FZ )
(see text in previous edition)
grave or especially grave crimes - the law dated 07.12.2011 N 420-ФЗ)
(see text in previous edition)
the law dated 08.12.2003 N 162-ФЗ)
(see text in previous edition)

 

[Ермаков Константин]

In other words, I was lucky to find a non-working norm of the Constitution and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the application of which is distorted in practice. The courts link the ability to testify in their native language with language skills. However, if you carefully read the same Code of Criminal Procedure, it says that "the accused has the right .... to testify in his native language", while the condition for knowing the national language of the proceedings is not imposed. Well, not him. Nevertheless, from the rostrum of courts of different levels I hear the same thing: "He speaks Russian, and therefore the right to testify in his native language is denied correctly." In other words, for those who are familiar with formal logic, this phrase on the contrary will sound like this: "He is forbidden to speak any language other than Russian." Here lies the complete absurdity of the situation, because it just contradicts the Constitution, which clearly states:

- "Everyone has the right to use their native language, to freely choose the language of communication, education, training and creativity." (Part 2 of Art. 26)

- "The accused has the right ..... to testify and explain in his native language or the language that he speaks; (Article 47 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation)

- “The parties are obligated to guarantee the accused person the right to use their regional or minority languages” ( European Charter of Languages
European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Strasbourg, November 5, 1992) - from the Charter, the regional language is Russian, Chechen (Nokhchi Mot) is the minority language.

-"IN h. 2 tbsp. 26 The Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes the right of everyone to use their native language. By virtue of the aforementioned constitutional norm, the court, at the request of the persons participating in the case, is obliged to provide them with the right to make statements, give explanations and testimonies, submit petitions and appear in court in their native language. "( The decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 31, 1995 N 8 “On some issues of the application by the courts of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the administration of justice”).

- "The courts need to keep in mind that the accused’s right to defense includes not only the right to use the assistance of a defense counsel, but also the right to defend himself in person and (or) with the help of a legal representative by all means and means not prohibited by law ( part 2 of article 16 , paragraph 46 of paragraph 4 of Article 46 , paragraph 47 of part 4 of article 47 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation), including giving explanations and testimonies regarding the suspicion regarding him or refusing to give explanations and testimonies; object to the prosecution, testify on the charges against him or refuse to testify; provide evidence; file petitions and challenges; to give explanations and testimonies in the native language or the language that he speaks "(Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 29, 2015" On the practice of the application by the courts of the law ensuring the right to defense in criminal proceedings ", etc. etc. .

In the meantime, these norms exist, the courts continue to play the fool, only the most important sharpie, the judge, dealt the cards.

 

[Ермаков Константин]

Dear Andrey Zakharov! I don’t agree about the submission of documents only in Russian. Here is a link to the court decision The Constitutional Court recognized the right of Gairbek Salbiev to submit applications to the Supreme Court in Ossetian , and I also have a different situation - my client speaks Russian, but chose Chechen for communication in court. I did not specifically request the court to provide an interpreter. It’s just that now the court itself will have to look for itself and other participants in the translator process in order to comply with the rule on the language of the proceedings - Russian. Already so that both the judge and the lawyer and the prosecutor would understand what he was talking about.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Before the question arises of attracting an interpreter, it is mandatory to find out whether the person who is subject to interrogation speaks Russian ... including requesting information about his education (up to the certificate or diploma indicating the marks on the subject "Russian language). ..and if there are positive assessments in these documents, in principle, no violations by the court or the investigation regarding interrogations in Russian will be revealed ... even maybe it can be vice versa ... if it is established that the person knows Russian very well , but does not want to testify on it, this may not be perceived in favor of this person .... and is regarded as an attempt to prevent the establishment of truth in the case ... something like this .... If someone is not happy with something during court proceedings, this "dissatisfied" person may file a complaint against a judge or investigator .... which will be examined and the actions of officials will be given an appropriate assessment ... all this is described in sufficient detail in the same Code of Criminal Procedure .... Of course, not always nor we are respected by the executives of "Themis" ..... but here it is up to a specific person who is not happy with the decisions ... and no one bothers him to appeal these actions in the manner regulated by the Law .....

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Dear Andrey Zakharov! I don’t agree about the submission of documents only in Russian. Here is a link to the court decision The Constitutional Court recognized the right of Gairbek Salbiev to submit applications to the Supreme Court in Ossetian , and I also have a different situation - my client speaks Russian, but chose Chechen for communication in court. I did not specifically request the court to provide an interpreter. It’s just that now the court itself will have to look for itself and other participants in the translator process in order to comply with the rule on the language of the proceedings - Russian. Already so that both the judge and the lawyer and the prosecutor would understand what he was talking about.

Dear Ermakov Konstantin))) Carefully read my posts .... It says that complaints, etc. can be submitted in any language ... but only the Russian text is still obligatory .... And a special application for the involvement of an interpreter is not required. .. The court or the investigating authority will find it and ensure its participation ... only the interrogation protocol will still be kept in Russian on the basis of the translation, which will be carried out by the translator, warned of criminal liability for incorrect translation ... something like this .... And we won’t argue anymore ... I don’t see the point .... And, as a supplement ... If, in principle, the same court is "angry" with such gadgets, that is. to demand a translator for a person who "is fluent in Russian" this may affect the sentence (if this person is of course the accused) ... and this sentence will obviously not be in the "favor" of the defendant))) This is already from practice .... From the same practice, any defender should be guided by the principle of “do no harm to the defendant” .... and if you conflict with the court, this is harm to the defendant, who can “get extra” when this could be avoided ... .And this is not a "buzz"))))

 

[Ермаков Константин]

.. if it is established that the person knows Russian well, but does not want to testify on it, this may not be perceived in favor of that person .... and is regarded as an attempt to interfere

 

[Ермаков Константин]

So is that the whole debate? Can a person fluent in Russian and Chechen languages choose their native Chechen? Legislation says it can. The Supreme Court explains that the court is even obliged to provide the conditions for this, and the judicial practice rested its horns and does not want to comply with the law

 

[Ермаков Константин]

Dear Ermakov Konstantin))) Carefully read my posts .... It says that complaints, etc. can be submitted in any language ... but only the Russian text is still obligatory .... And a special application for the involvement of an interpreter is not required. .. The court or the investigating authority will find it and ensure its participation ... only the interrogation protocol will still be kept in Russian on the basis of the translation, which will be carried out by the translator, warned of criminal liability for incorrect translation ... something like this .... And we won’t argue anymore ... I don’t see the point .... And, as a supplement ... If, in principle, the same court is "angry" with such gadgets, that is. to demand a translator for a person who "is fluent in Russian" this may affect the sentence (if this person is of course the accused) ... and this sentence will obviously not be in the "favor" of the defendant))) This is already from practice .... From the same practice, any defender should be guided by the principle of “do no harm to the defendant” .... and if you conflict with the court, this is harm to the defendant, who can “get extra” when this could be avoided ... .And this is not a "buzz"))))