Procedural Status of Persons Specified in Part 3 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

In modern Russian criminal proceedings, the practice of seizing property of persons specified in Part 3 of Article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, often also referred to as third parties, has become widespread. The Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation neither defines the procedure for involving such persons in criminal proceedings nor their procedural status. At the same time, some of their individual rights are already enshrined in the law, while others implied by its meaning and are actually implemented in practice. This allows us to speak of the emergence of a new special participant in criminal proceedings and the de facto formation of their procedural status that while acquiring certain rights of a party in a court hearing does not become a party thereof. The scope of their powers in criminal proceedings is determined by the intention to protect their property that is at risk of confiscation. For the legitimate interests of such persons to be protected in a more effective way, it is proposed to expand their powers in the process. To this end, they should be allowed to participate in court hearings both to review the material on the seizure of property and to consider the merits of the criminal case in which the property was seized; to involve representatives, including lawyers, to protect their rights and legitimate interests; to receive copies of final decisions both on the materials regarding the seizure of property (relevant rulings) and on the criminal case (verdicts, decisions to terminate the criminal case). 

1. Alimova AI. Selected problems of criminal procedure regulation and law enforcement practice of imposing and appealing seizure of property of owners (bona fide purchasers). Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Udmurt University]. 2017;27(5):92-99. (In Russ.).

2. Denisova MD. On the grounds for seizing the property of third parties in criminal proceedings. Vestnik Ufimskogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii. 2023;2(100):97-103. (In Russ.).

3. Grikebich OA. Application of Part 3 of Article 115 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation in a specific case of Aurora MS LLC. Sudebnaya vlast i ugolovnyy protsess. 2018;2:199-209. (In Russ.).

4. Iskandirov VB. Seizure of property in criminal proceedings. The author’s abstract of Cand. Diss. (Law). Chelyabinsk; 2012. (In Russ.).

5. Malysheva OA. Legality and validity of property seizure in the investigation of a criminal case. Lex russica. 2021;74(6):118-126. (In Russ.).

6. Muryleva-Kazak VV. Procedural means of protecting the property rights of persons who are not participants in criminal proceedings. The author’s abstract of Cand. Diss. (Law). Moscow; 2023. (In Russ.).

7. Muryleva-Kazak VV. The legality of the purposes of seizing the property of third parties in criminal proceedings as a criterion for the legality of state interference in property rights. Ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo [Criminal proceedings]. 2022;2:37-41. (In Russ.).

8. Zinoviev KA. Legal mechanisms for ensuring the procedural guarantees of third parties when property is seized. Yuridicheskaya nauka [Legal Science]. 2019;5:60-64. (In Russ.).