The justice system is so weak that victims of crime often have little recourse, even if they know who the criminals are, especially if the criminals are associated with gangsters or the elite. The New York Times described a man who was the victim of a highway robbery. Although those involved in the crime were arrested after the robbery, they were not arrested because one of them was the son of a major gangster. 15Historians have generally confirmed contemporary complaints that local governments and courts were corrupt and inefficient before 1775,20 but recent studies – studies on witchcraft21, peasant communal justice22 and local courts, especially in non-Russian border areas23 – soften this picture somewhat. Much more systematic local studies of pre-1775 justice throughout the empire are needed. 25 Scholars find the reasons for the failure of the new courts in the overly idealistic jurists who drafted the reform, or in the general inability to change the patrimonial styles of government or the political attitudes of provincial officials.36 Others see not failure, but diversity and adaptation: William Pomeranz presents civil procedure lawyers as champions of individual rights and the rule of law; Jonathan Daly notes that the urban population was ready and took advantage of the new courts; Robert Crews and Stefan Kirmse report how Muslim communities in the empire “shopped” between Russian and Islamic courts. Kirmse finds a rich new field of research in the dynamic “penetration” of local and central legal systems in non-Russian border areas and “internal peripheries” (non-Russian peoples living within the central provincial administration, as in the Central Volga)37. The judiciary faces many problems and a general lack of trust, but it has also made great strides recently. There have been serious violations of the accepted doctrine of separation of powers, systematic attempts to undermine jury trials, problems with access to justice, problems with judicial infrastructure, financial support and corruption. But the judiciary has also seen fairer and more efficient administration, strengthened rule of law, moves toward a more adversarial system, and increased use of the judicial system under Putin.

After passing the qualifying examination, a candidate must take the lawyer`s oath. From the moment he was sworn in, he became a lawyer and a member of the Chamber of Advocates of the competent federal subject of Russia. The Bar Association sends the relevant information to the territorial subdivision of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, which includes the new lawyer in the register of lawyers of the relevant federal entity of Russia, and on the basis of this information issues him a lawyer`s certificate, which is the only official document confirming the status of lawyer. The status of lawyer is granted for an indefinite period and is not limited by age. There is only 1 Chamber of Advocates in each federal subject of Russia. Each lawyer can only be a member of 1 bar association and can only be registered in the register of lawyers of the respective federal entity of Russia. In case of moving to another region, the lawyer ceases to be a member of the Bar Association and must be excluded from the register of lawyers of the former place of residence (the lawyer`s certificate must be returned to the subdepartment of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation that issued it), after which he becomes a member of the Bar Association and is entered in the register of lawyers of the new place. of residence (where he receives a new lawyer`s certificate) without examinations. Any lawyer may practise throughout Russia, regardless of whether he belongs to a particular regional bar association and regardless of a specific regional register in which he or she is registered.

Lawyers carry out their professional activity individually (Law firm) or as a member of the lawyer`s legal person (Bar Association, Law Firm). The lawyer can open his own practice after at least 3 years of legal practice within the college or office. A lawyer who has opened his own practice cannot be a member of a lawyer`s legal person, and a lawyer who is a member of a lawyer`s legal person cannot be a member of another lawyer`s legal person. The lawyer is obliged to notify the Chamber of Advocates of any change in the composition of a college or presidium and the opening and closing of a firm. [27] The Russian judiciary is highly developed, but obstacles to the establishment of an independent judiciary remain, despite progress in reforming the legal and judicial system, particularly in the early 1990s. Governed by the 1993 Constitution, the legacy of the Soviet Union, in which the judiciary was part of the law enforcement system and the judge had no more institutional or personal independence from the executive than a police officer or employee, remains powerful. It is far from clear that the executive and legislative branches have adopted changes wholeheartedly or systematically, and lack of political will or consensus is a major factor in slow and uneven progress on reforms. [4] However, these positive developments are hampered by less promising trends that raise concerns about Russia`s ability to complete the transition to an accessible, efficient, transparent and credible justice system.

We have identified four main problems: problems related to the non-enforcement of court decisions, obstacles to the international human rights protection system, insufficient independence of the judiciary and excessive law enforcement powers. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia did not have a civil code, which is the cornerstone of civil law in the United States and Europe. Olga Schwartz, an expert on Russia, described the Russian judicial system as “the coexistence and mutual influence of two completely different legal systems, old and new.” Communist justice was not based on the idea of innocence until proven otherwise. Those accused of crimes were almost always convicted and sentences were rarely overturned. The purpose of the judicial system was to protect the interests of the state, not those of the individual, and to keep the masses under control. The judiciary is not independent. The courts were subordinate to the Communist Party and the National People`s Congress and generally responded to their wishes. The Soviet Supreme Court, the highest court in the Soviet Union, was composed of judges who served for five years. 13The case law is rich and largely undeveloped for the eighteenth century. The archives of the Senate as a court of appeal provide new perspectives, as do the archives of the Synod, the collegial institution that Peter I imposed on the Orthodox Church, thus depriving it of much of its secular judicial authority. The synod oversaw episcopal tribunals for marriage, divorce, and religious crimes; Monastic courts also decreased in jurisdiction and number, as Peter I and especially Catherine II secularized the majority of Russian monasteries.

Under the “empire of difference” model, Moscow negotiated various judicial agreements: petty crimes and disputes continued to be handled by local communities (Islamic, Baltic German, Cossack, Siberian and indigenous steppes); by the end of the century, Moscow had integrated most of the Cossack communities into the central administrative and judicial systems; In the western border regions, the established German, Swedish and Polish courts have apparently merged with the Tsarist courts, a subject that deserves our attention. The Ministry of Justice manages the Russian judicial system. The Department`s responsibilities include the establishment of courts and the appointment of judges at lower levels than the federal district courts. The Department also collects forensic statistics and conducts sociological research and education programs on crime prevention. For judicial infrastructure and financial support, judges must rely on the Ministry of Justice, and for housing, they must rely on the local authorities of the jurisdiction in which they sit. In 1995, the average salary of a judge was $160 per month, much less than the income associated with lower positions in Russian society. These circumstances, combined with irregularities in the appointment process and the continuing strong position of prosecutors, deprived lower court judges of independent authority.* The system introduced by the 1864 Act was remarkable in that it introduced two completely separate judicial systems, each with its own courts of appeal and coming into contact only in the Senate. as the Supreme Court of Cassation.

The first, on the English model, are the courts of the elected judges of the Community, which have jurisdiction over minor cases, whether civil or criminal; The second, based on the French model, are the ordinary courts of appointed judges, who sit with or without a jury to hear important cases. [1] A jury must be 25 years of age, have legal capacity and have a criminal record. [11] The criminal justice system restricted the rights of the accused. There was no jury trial. Prosecutors won 99% of their cases and judgments were usually predetermined. Arrests were often announced after prosecutors had enough evidence to convict them. Defenders, if they existed, were not taken seriously. They often had to submit their own document if they wanted copies of requests or opinions. 27Research on the Russian criminal justice system up to the nineteenth century has revealed important lines of research. He abandoned the traditional idealization of the judicial reform of 1864 as the beginning of a new progressive era and placed it critically in a long-term continuity of legal practice.