The Institution of Jurisdiction as a Procedural Mechanism for Ensuring Access to Justice

Within the criminal procedural framework for ensuring access to justice, the institution of jurisdiction serves as a universal mechanism that guarantees a person’s practical ability to seek judicial protection at any stage of criminal proceedings. The significant legislative transformations to which the rules governing jurisdiction have been subjected in recent years have brought into focus the question whether this institution is capable not merely of performing a technical function of allocating criminal cases among courts, but also of safeguarding access to specific procedural rights. The findings of the study indicate a marked departure by the Russian legislature from the previously established model of differentiated jurisdiction. The blurring of boundaries among the jurisdiction of military courts, courts of general jurisdiction, and magistrate courts has resulted from a disregard for the procedural and institutional particularities of their respective functions. The author demonstrates that the mechanism for changing jurisdiction in order to ensure the personal safety of participants in criminal proceedings is characterized by undue complexity and a narrowly circumscribed scope of application. Conversely, the procedure for removing and transferring a criminal case to another court to safeguard the objectivity and impartiality of the trial is marked by indeterminacy and, in essence, duplicates the procedure for challenging a panel of judges. An analysis of specific judicial decisions shows that these circumstances prevent the full potential of the mechanism for changing jurisdiction from being realized and contribute to inconsistent judicial practice. The study substantiates the need to legitimize changes in territorial jurisdiction in the event of certain insurmountable circumstances that restrict access to justice, particularly in cases where there is a prolonged inability to empanel a jury.

1. Ababkov AV. Development of special subject and personal jurisdiction of criminal cases to military courts. In: Institute of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings. Proceedings of the 1st All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference «Actual Problems of the Russian Criminal Process». Moscow: Yurlitinform Publ.; 2024. (In Russ.).

2. Behalo SV. Jurisdiction in Russian criminal proceedings. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2024. (In Russ.).

3. Dikarev IS. Issues of jurisdiction of criminal cases to military courts. Law in the Armed Forces — Military Legal Review. 2020;6(275):63-69. (In Russ.).

4. Dikarev IS. Special procedure for proceedings in military courts in cases of terrorist crimes: historical parallels. The Rule of Law State: Theory and Practice. 2022;4(70):130-137. (In Russ.). Golovko LV (ed.). Course of criminal proceedings. 3rd ed. Moscow; 2021. (In Russ.).

5. Golovko LV. Institute of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings: boundaries between value and technical dimension In: Institute of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings. Proceedings of the 1st All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference «Actual Problems of the Russian Criminal Process». Moscow: Yurlitinform Publ.; 2024. (In Russ.).

6. Kalinovsky KB. Changing the jurisdiction of a criminal case as a means of ensuring the safety of participants in a criminal process. Proceedings of International Scientific and Practical Conference (October 29–30, 2009). 2010;6:228-231. (In Russ.).

7. Khomyakov SA. On the territorial jurisdiction of civil cases to the military courts of the Russian Federation and the determination of their territorial jurisdiction. Russian Judge. 2014;1:28-33. (In Russ.).

8. Konovalova EE, Chekulaev DP. Territorial jurisdiction of criminal cases at the choice of the prosecution: de lege lata et de lege ferenda. Zakonodatelstvo i praktika. 2020;2(45):27-31. (In Russ.).

9. Korolev VA. Problems of considering criminal cases of private prosecution as a result of changes in jurisdiction. Law and Order. 2019;2:5‑6. (In Russ.).

10. Litvinenko KL. Ensuring the right of citizens to access justice at the stage of initiating a criminal case. Author’s Abstract. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2012. (In Russ.).

11. Pupysheva LA. The phenomenon of jurisdiction in the Russian criminal process: problems of theory and legislative regulation. Philosophy of Law. 2021;1(96):100-108. (In Russ.).

12. Savitsky VM. On the presumption of innocence and other principles of the criminal process. In: Larin AM, Melnikova EB, Savitsky VM. The criminal process of Russia: Lectures-Essays. Moscow: Beck Publ.; 1997. (In Russ.).

13. Semenov SN. Change in territorial jurisdiction in criminal proceedings as a guarantee of access to justice (issues of application and improvement of legislation. Bulletin of the Amur State University, Series: Humanities. 2008;42:18-21. (In Russ.).

14. Sidorov VV. Supervisory proceedings in criminal proceedings as a means of ensuring the right to access justice. Author’s Abstract. Cand. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2011. (In Russ.).

15. Voronina NA. The victim’s right to access to justice and its implementation in pre-trial criminal proceedings. Author’s Abstract. Cand. Sci. (law) Diss. Moscow; 2024. (In Russ.).