The presumption of innocence in administrative law is one of the most interesting principles in the regulatory system. Despite the clarity of the wording of the text of the law, its application is controversial. In addition, in some cases, the presumption is partially revoked.
The meaning of the principle
The presumption of innocence in administrative law establishes the limits of accountability. The provisions are quite specific. But his presence is misleading people.
Citizens, when confronted with the police or other authorities, believe that this rule completely exempts them from the need to act, presenting evidence or be otherwise active in refuting the charge. However, this is not so, having rights, it is worth using them fully, protecting yourself. For this reason, the presumption of innocence in administrative law is an instrument in the hands of those involved.
The grounds for its application
The question often arises, is the presumption of innocence in administrative law valid? There is an opinion that the Constitution affects only criminal proceedings. The Constitutional Court in its acts extends the effect of these provisions to the sphere of administrative responsibility. He notes guilt as an integral element of the structure of human responsibility and the need to prove it. The ECHR, in its decisions regarding Russia, considers administrative responsibility a kind of criminal. For this reason, the exclusion of the principle of the presumption of innocence from the scope of the CAO is unacceptable.
Normative regulation
The application of the presumption of innocence in administrative law is governed by the Constitution and the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses. The provisions of the Convention on Human Rights, on the basis of which the ECHR operates, cannot be repealed.
The next court to explain the application of this principle is the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. In his acts, including “rejected” definitions, the understanding of the norms of Art. 1.5 CAO.
The Supreme Court made its contribution to understanding the provisions of the code in one of its decisions, providing general explanations.
The provisions of the article are universal, they apply to all subsequent rules of the code. Exceptions are provided directly only in it.
What is the point?
The principle of the presumption of innocence in administrative law is as follows:
- Lack of guilt precludes prosecution.
- Guilt is proved in compliance with the procedural order.
- A person is considered guilty from the moment the decision is made by the authorized body.
- Insoluble doubts are interpreted in favor of the person involved.
- The involved person is not required to prove his innocence, with some exceptions.
Lack of guilt
Guilt is assumed in two forms: intentional and reckless. If the article of the law as a basis for liability implies intentional actions, then negligence exempts from liability.
If the person involved disproves the presence of guilt, regardless of the form in which it is supposed, he is also exempted from liability.
Process Compliance
The formation of the case materials and its consideration by an authorized body or court should be conducted in accordance with the procedural rules. If they are violated, the decision made on the merits shall be canceled.
Violations affect two areas: factual and procedural. In the first case, not all facts were revealed or the official acknowledged the fact without any reason.Procedural violations are associated with the correctness of the preparation of procedural documents, actions of authorized persons.
For example, a protocol was drawn up with significant violations. The authorized body or court of first instance did not consider the proposed evidence, including evidence in favor of the person involved.
At the same time, not all violations are considered significant, but only affecting the results of the review. Even if the person involved is in fact guilty, the decision may be canceled. The reason is the impossibility to establish the truth due to distortions made in the compilation of materials and their consideration on the merits.
The moment of guilt
The entry into force of a decision means that the person or organization is found guilty after it takes effect. The appeal period has expired or the case has been reviewed by the appellate or cassation instance. For a higher court, the fact of guilt during the review of the complaint does not matter.
Doubt
One element of the presumption of innocence in the Russian Federation implies the absence of doubt. For example, on the record, we clearly distinguish the car number and the person's face. It does not create ambiguity in the circumstances of the offense.
Doubts arise due to incompleteness of information in the minutes or other documents of the case. They are deemed fatal if it is impossible to come to an unambiguous conclusion about the circumstances of the case.
How is the presumption limited?
The presumption of innocence in the administrative law of Russia is partially applicable:
- in the field of traffic;
- in the field of land improvement (prohibitions are prescribed in regional laws;
- if the violation is committed by the owner of the vehicle or property;
- fixation made by technical means of recording or shooting.
Points on the need to prove the fact of guilt continue to operate, a person is considered guilty from the moment a decision is made in the event of significance of fatal doubts, as well as the need to comply with the norms of the process.
Practicing lawyers consider the exceptions incorrect, contrary to the Constitution. The presumption of innocence, in their opinion, is thereby unlawfully limited. Why? A similar norm leads to two problems.
Firstly, not everyone has the ability to collect evidence, and secondly, some facts are difficult to refute. For example, the fixation device worked with violations and distorted information about the speed of the vehicle got into the database. The abolition of the penalty order for many in such a situation becomes a fluke.
Finally
The presumption of innocence includes a number of aspects. Citizens are familiar mainly with one of them - no one is considered guilty until his guilt is proved.
The law also provides for the restrictions of this particular element in the event of a violation in the field of traffic and landscaping recorded by special devices.
In any case, the person who is held accountable needs to make efforts to uphold his position: to refute the arguments, to declare the inclusion of new evidence. It is advisable to state all petitions and arguments on paper, and keep a copy with a mark on admission.