To the admissibility of the civil law exemption of property from arrest, imposed in the criminal proceedings: domestic and foreign experience

The subject of paper deals with the legal nature of measures of criminal procedural compulsion
in the form of seizure of property.
Methodological basis of the article is based on general scientific dialectical methods of cognition
of objective reality of the legal processes and phenomena that allowed us to conduct an
objective assessment of the state of legislation and law enforcement practice in the procedural
aspects of the cancellation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings of Russia.
The results and scope of it’s application. It is submitted that the cancellation of the seizure
of the property (or the individual limit) is allowed only on the grounds and in the manner
prescribed by the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. However, the study
found serious contradictions in the application of the relevant law. In particular, cases in
which the question of exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory),imposed in the criminal case was resolved in a civil procedure that, in the opinion of theauthor of the publication, is extremely unacceptable.

On the stated issues topics analyzes opinions of scientists who say that the dispute about
the release of impounded property may be allowed in civil proceedings, including pending
resolution of the criminal case on the merits. The author strongly disagrees with this position
and supports those experts who argue that the filing of a claim for exemption of property
from arrest (exclusion from the inventory) the reviewed judicial act of imposing of arrest
without recognition per se invalid. In this regard, the author cites the legal position of
the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, from which clearly follows that of the
right of everyone to judicial protection does not imply the possibility of choice of the citizen
at its discretion, techniques and procedures of judicial protection, since the features of such
judicial protection is defined in specific Federal laws.
The author analyzes and appreciates Kazakhstan's experience of legal regulation of the permissibility
of filing a civil claim for exemption of property from seizure imposed in criminal
proceedings. The author notes that the new civil procedural legislation of the Republic of
Kazakhstan, which came into force from 01 January 2016, clearly captures that consideration
in the civil proceedings are not subject to claims for exemption of property from seizure
by the criminal prosecution body.
Conclusions. Necessity of amendment to article 422 of the Civil Procedure Code of Russia:
this article should not apply to cases of application of measures of criminal procedural compulsion
in the form of seizure of property. Among other things, the author proposed additions
to part 9 of article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.

1. Bushnaya N.V. Problems of application of procedural measures of restraint in the stage of preliminary investigation, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Volgograd, 2005. 25 p. (In Russ.).

2. Ionov V.A. The seizure of the property in the conduct of preliminary investigation on criminal cases about economic crimes, Cand. Diss. Nizhnii Novgorod, 2010. 246 p. (In Russ.).

3. Tutynin I.B. Seizure of property as a measure of criminal procedural coercion, Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2005. 213 p. (In Russ.).

4. Khanzhin V.I. Criminal procedure and the organizational and tactical foundations of the seizure of the property, Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2006. 192 p. (In Russ.).

5. Bulatov B.B., Dezhnev A.S. Place of seizure of property in criminal procedural law: history and modernity. Nauchnyi Vestnik Omskoi akademii MVD Rossii, 2016, no. 2, pp. 18–24. (In Russ.).

6. Bulatov B.B., Dezhnev A.S. Legislative regulation of the term of seizure of property in criminal proceedings. Rossiskii sledovatel' = Russian Investigator, 2016, no. 1, pp. 12–16. (In Russ.).

7. Veshchikov V.Yu. The seizure of property and securities: problems of legislative regulation and law enforcement. Prokuror = Procurator, 2015, no. 1, pp. 88–91. (In Russ.).

8. Dzhelali T.I. On the question of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings. Yurist-Pravoved = Jurist-Pravoved, 2016, no. 3, pp. 54–57. (In Russ.).

9. Ivanov D.A. The essence of the seizure of the property as measures of criminal procedural coercion. Sudebnaya vlast’ i ugolovnyiy protsess = Judicial authority and criminal process, 2016, no. 2, pp. 158–163. (In Russ.).

10. Kakhkhorov D.G., Eliseev A.M. The Institute of seizure of assets: problems and innovations. Zhurnal sovremennoy yurisprudentsii, 2016, no. 7, pp. 11–16. (In Russ.).

11. Kolokolov N.A. A typical violation of the law in the imposition of arrest on property. Ugolovnyi protsess = Criminal procedure, 2012, no. 10, pp. 56–57. (In Russ.).

12. Kondratenko Z.K. Legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the issue of limitations of private property rights in the imposition of arrest on property. Rossiiskii sud'ya = Russian Judge, 2015, no. 12, pp. 41–44. (In Russ.).

13. Kutazova I.V. The seizure of the property. Vestnik Barnaul’skogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii, 2016, no. 2, pp. 55–57. (In Russ.).

14. Mezhenina E.V. The seizure of property as a restriction of property rights in the russian criminal proceedings. Rossiiskii yuridicheskii zhurnal = Russian Juridical Journal, 2016, no. 2, pp. 96–102. (In Russ.).

15. Sokolova M.V. Imposition of arrest on property to ensure compensation for moral harm caused by the crime. Molodoi uchenyi = Young scentist, 2016, no. 25.1, pp. 26–28. (In Russ.).

16. Yutkina S.M., Rostovsрchikova O.V. Imposition of arrest on property as a measure of criminal procedural coercion: history, theory, practice. Vestnik Volgogradskoy akademii MVD Rossii = Volgograd Academy of the Russian Internal Affairs Ministry’s Digest, 2012, no. 4, pp. 144–156. (In Russ.).

17. Azarov V.A., Nurbaev D.M. Controversial issues of seizure of property in criminal proceedings, in: Criminal proceedings: the contemporary state and basic directions of improvement, Proceedings of the international scientific-

18. practical conference dedicated to the 50th anniversary of doctor of legal sciences, professor A.V. Grinenko, Moscow, Moscow State Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia; Moscow Academy of Economics and Law Publ., 2016, pp. 258–263. (In Russ.).

19. Kirillova N.P., Lodyzhenskaja I.I. The value of the decisions of the Сonstitutional Court of the Russian Federation for legislative regulation and practice of seizure of property in criminal cases. Leningradskii yuridicheskii zhurnal = Leningrad juridical journal, 2015, no. 1, pp. 197–209. (In Russ.).

20. El'mashev Ju.V. Procedural complexity of the appeal of decisions on seizure of property. Ugolovnyi protsess = Criminal procedure, 2010, no. 7, pp. 16–21. (In Russ.).

21. Ostroumov N.V. Protection of the rights of legitimate owners in the imposition of arrest on property. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2014, no. 11, pp. 114–120. (In Russ.).