The full text of the article is available only in Russian.
The judgment of the Russian Constitutional Court (the RCC) on the executability of the ECtHR judgment on pecuniary damage in the case of Yukos v. Russia has not been popular among researchers, maybe because it was surrounded by a shady political context. However, its reasoning deserves special attention. This article aims at comparing the arguments of the Russian Constitutional Court in support of retroactive change of rules of statutory time-bar for prosecution of tax offences and the reasoning of the constitutional and supreme courts of the Member States of the Council of Europe in cases related to retroactive extension, reinstatement or abolition of the statutory limitations for criminal prosecution (of non-international crimes). As a rule, such extraordinary measures were introduced to allow prosecution of crimes that remained unpunished due to lawless policy of the former regime (Nazi, Communist) or because of inoperability of the judicial system in the course of war and post-war reconstruction. Despite the presupposed sanctity of nullum crimen sine lege и lex severior retro non agit principles, the extension of unexpired limitation periods in such situations has been almost everywhere declared compatible with the national constitutions and the article 7 of the European Convention on human rights. The reinstatement of already expired limitation periods was criticized by the constitutional supervision bodies of Hungary, Poland and Croatia for its inconsistency with the principle of legal certainty. However, in Germany, Czech Republic and Poland (with respect to the Communist crimes) even the reinstatement was allowed. The constitutional and supreme courts of these countries argued that the reset of limitation periods was compatible with the rule of law using a fiction of their “freezing” by virtue of failure to prosecute specific types of crimes on the orders of the ruling regimes. The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, the Constitutional Court of Czech Republic and the Supreme Court of Poland shared the Russian Constitutional Court’s opinion that the prohibition of retroactivity of law defining a crime did not cover the statutory limitations. And the Russian Constitutional Court’s reference to the historical circumstances of interpretation of the statutory limitations in the Yukos case can be seen as a timid attempt to bring this interpretation into the context of combat with systematic impunity. However, this line of argument is not based on the factual evidence of the existence of such context in the field of the tax control in Russia in the respective time period.
About the author: Nikolay Bobrinskiy – LL.M., Practicing Lawyer, Moscow, Russi
Citation: Bobrinskiy N. (2019) Izmenenie srokov davnosti privlecheniya k publichno-pravovoy otvetstvennosti s obratnoy siloy: postanovlenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossii ot 19 yanvarya 2017 goda №1-P v evropeyskom kontekste [Retroactive change of statutory limitations for prosecution of criminal offences: the judgment of the Russian Constitutional Court of 19 January 2017 in the European context]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.28, no.5, pp.72–89. (In Russian).
Antonov A., Yevseev O. (2019) Amnistii v mekhanizme perekhodnogo pravosudiya [Amnesties in the mechanism of transitional justice]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.9, no.1, pp.1–16. (In Russian).
Arapov N.A. (2015) Printsip podderzhaniya doveriya grazhdan k zakonu i deystviyam gosudarstva v rossiyskom konstitutsionnom prave i pravosudii: Dis. …kand. yurid. nauk [The principle of protection of the citizens’ trust in law and the governmental activities in the Russian constitutional law and justice: Cand. in law sci. diss.], Saint Petersburg. (In Russian).
Bondar’ N.S. (2018) Konstitutsiya Rossii v usloviyakh global’nykh peremen pravovoy zhizni: ot politicheskikh illyuziy k yuridicheskomu realizmu [The Constitution of Russia in the Context of Global Changes in Legal Life: From Political Illusions to Legal Realism]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.12, pp.18–32. (In Russian).
Brems E. (2011) Transitional Justice in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights. International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol.5, no.2, pp.282–303.
Buyse A., Hamilton M. (2011) Transitional Jurisprudence and the European Convention on Human Rights. Justice, Politics and Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cassese A. (2006) Balancing the Prosecution of Crimes Against Humanity and Non-Retroactivity of Criminal Law: The Kolk and Kislyiy v. Estonia Case before the ECHR. Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol.4, no.2, pp.410–418.
Chavez Tafur G. (2008) Using International Law to By-Pass Domestic Legal Hurdles: On the Applicability of the Statute of Limitations in the Menéndez et al. case. Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol.6, no.5, pp.1061–1075.
Daniluk P., Leciak M. (2016) Statute of Limitations in the Polish Criminal Law. Journal of Eastern-European Criminal Law, no.2, pp.150–161.
Elinskiy A.V. (2012) Zapret obratnoy sily bolee strogogo ugolovnogo zakona v interpretatsii Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka i organov sudebnogo konstitutsionnogo kontrolya [Prohibition of the retroactive force of stricter criminal law in the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights and bodies of judicial constitutional control]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.21, no.1, pp.104–114. (In Russian).
Gracheva S.A. (2018) Razvitie kontsepta konstitutsionnoy identichnosti v svyazi s poiskom podkhodov k razresheniyu konventsionno-konstitutsionnykh kolliziy [Development of Concept of Constitutional Identity in Connection with the Search for Approaches to Resolving of Collisions of Constitutional Regulators and Law of the European Convention of Human Rights]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.9, pp.52–64. (In Russian).
Kok R. (2007) Statutory Limitations in International Law, The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.
Grosescu R. (2017) Judging Communist Crimes in Romania: Transnational and Global Influences. International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol.11, no.3, pp.505–524.
Kritz N.J. (ed.) (1995) Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes, Washington, D.C.: USIP Press.
Millard F. (2019) The Prosecution of Past Crimes: Working Paper 4. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/13272764/Transitional_Justice._Working_Paper_4._The_Prosecution_of_Past_Crimes (accessed: 08.07.2019).
Roksandić Vidlička S. (2014) Possible Future Challenge for the ECtHR?: Importance of the Act on Exemption and the Sanader case for Transitional Justice Jurisprudence and the Development of Transitional Justice Policies. Zbornik Pravnog Fakulteta u Zagrebu, vol.64, no.5–6, pp.1091–1119.
Roksandić Vidlička S. (2017) Transitional Justice Measures and Application of Law for Economic Crimes in Croatia: What Can Macedonia and Balkan Countries Learn Out of Them? Macedonian Journal for Criminal Law & Criminology, vol.24, no.1, pp.343–362.
Sadurski W. (2016) Konstitutsionalism perekhodnogo perioda protiv verkhovenstva prava? [Transitional constitutionalism versus the rule of law?]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.25, no.3, pp.13–28. (In Russian).
Schulhofer S., Rosenfeld M., Teitel R., Erier R. (1992) Vengriya: Dilemmy spravedlivosti [Hungary: Dilemmas of justice]. Konstitutshionnoe pravo: vostochnoevropeyskoe obozrenie, vol.1, no.1, pp.41–45.
Sweeney J. (2013) The European Court of Human Rights in Post-Cold War Era, Abingdon: Routledge.
Winter S. (2013) Towards a Unified Theory of Transitional Justice. International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol.7, no.2, pp.224–244.
Zhuravleva O.O. (2018). Printsip podderzhaniya doveriya grazhdan k zakonu i deystviyam gosudarstva v nalogovoy sfere [The principle of protection of the citizens’ trust in law and governmental activities in the tax sphere]. Nalogoved, no.9, pp.21–28. (In Russian).
Zhalinskiy A.E. (2006) Sovremennoe nemetskoe ugolovnoe pravo [The modern German criminal law], Moscow: Prospekt. (In Russian).
Yevseyev O. (2017) Gibridnye sudy kak institut tranzitivnogo pravosudiya [Hybrid court as an institute of transitional justice]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.7, no.3, pp.47–61. (In Russian).
Moscow, Shchepkina str., 8
+7 (495) 608-69-59
+7 (495) 608-66-35