History of creation and current challenges

Colonel-General of Justice Anatoly MURANOV, Deputy Minister-Head of the Military Courts Department of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, Honored Lawyer of the Russian Federation, Professor of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

In December 1918, the Revolutionary Military Tribunal of the Republic began its work, managing all military tribunals. The date of one of its first administrative sessions, which took place on December 8, 1918, went down in history as the day of formation of the military courts of the Russian Federation.

80 years is a date that allows you to take stock and evaluate the role and significance of modern military-judicial bodies in the life of the reformed Armed Forces of Russia.

The formation of military courts and their approval as an integral part of the unified judicial system went through a number of stages. The tasks of military courts, the jurisdiction and procedural forms of their activities were radically changed. There have been attempts in history to eliminate the military-judicial bodies altogether, but life has rejected them, because they were necessary to carry out an effective fight against crime in specific army conditions. It is all the more surprising that in recent years the same question has repeatedly arisen: do we need military courts? Along the way, such options for "reforming" the military-judicial system were proposed, which would actually lead to its destruction.

What are the reasons for this? Without touching on the opportunistic or pseudo-democratic considerations that guide those who make such proposals, I am sure that the old ideas about military courts as repressive bodies are largely affected here.

Many people know the history of military courts only in general terms, more about the "dark sides" that really took place, and to a much lesser extent about other colors of the historical palette. I don't think it should be sugarcoated or denigrated. It is also appropriate to say that only now, when previously closed archives have become available, can we more fully reconstruct the actual history of military tribunals.

From the very first days of its existence, two opposite trends can be seen in the activities of the revvoentribunals. To keep silent about any of them is to distort the truth. The courts, on the one hand, were the "punishing sword" of revolutionary justice, organs of extreme repression, and on the other hand, the decisions they actually made, the practice of assigning punishments, make us question the thesis about military tribunals as cruel and merciless punitive bodies.

The appeal of the Revolutionary Military Tribunal of the Eastern Front emphasized: "Exceptional circumstances require exceptional measures, and the revolutionary military tribunal declares that it will take all measures to mercilessly destroy the criminal elements that have infiltrated the Red Army." When you study the nature and dynamics of punishments based on the preserved statistical reports, it turns out that the tribunal, for example, of the Zavolzhsky Military District, convicted 10 percent (mostly members of Sapozhkov's gang) to execution in 1920, 10 percent to imprisonment, 75 percent to a suspended sentence, and acquitted 5 percent from the total number of cases held in different cases. Similar statistics can be traced in the same year in the activities of other Tribunals. In total, 5,757 people were sentenced to execution by the Revolutionary Military Tribunals, which accounted for 5.4 percent of the total number of convicts. At the same time, 16.4 percent were acquitted and 22.8 percent were convicted on probation.

Another example. The first Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Tribunal of the Republic, K. K. Danishevsky, said in an interview with the Izvestia VTSIK newspaper: "Military tribunals are not guided and should not be guided by any legal norms. These are punitive organs created in the course of the most intense revolutionary struggle." In fact, it was the employees of the military tribunals who developed the first detailed instructions and regulations defining lists of criminal acts and punishments, regulating the procedure for judicial proceedings. Many of these documents were then used in the drafting process and formed the basis of the first Soviet codes of 1922.

In the thirties, the country's life was overshadowed by the unfolding repressions. The main role in their implementation belonged to non-judicial bodies (special meetings, "twos", "troikas"), but military tribunals also took a significant part in this. The military judges were subjected to severe trials.

By the early thirties, there were many honest and conscientious people working in the military justice system who had passed the school of revolutionary struggle and believed in the ideals of the revolution. Their tragedy was that in the context of Stalin's personality cult and under the influence of his theory of the aggravation of the class struggle within the country in the course of socialist construction, they perceived as inevitable measures to suppress the "enemies of the people". But when this began to take on the character of mass repression, a number of military judges openly protested against lawlessness and arbitrariness. Many simply tried to fulfill the law honestly. Almost all of them were repressed and died. Such was the sad fate of most of the presidents of military tribunals of districts, armies and garrisons in those years.

Only after Stalin's death, especially in the early sixties, did justice begin to be restored, and the good names of military courts and citizens who died during the years of repression were restored. The main burden of reviewing cases and rehabilitating those wrongly convicted fell on the military-judicial authorities. This painstaking work continues at the present time.

A special period in the activity of military tribunals is associated with the Great Patriotic War. In wartime conditions, they severely punished enemy spies, cowards and alarmists, protected the inviolability of the commander's order, the military oath, thereby strengthening discipline and order both at the front and in the rear. When the situation demanded it, military judges, without sparing their lives, bravely fought the enemy with weapons in their hands, raised fighters to attack, fought out of the encirclement, led partisan groups, contributing to the common cause of victory over the enemy.

Most of the officers and employees of the Tribunals were awarded orders and medals for their courage and heroism during the war. Unfortunately, many of them died before they reached the victory days.

After the war, the work of military tribunals was restructured in relation to peacetime conditions. They have become the body that administers justice to military personnel who have committed crimes. At the same time, it should be emphasized that in their judicial activities, military tribunals have always been guided by the criminal and criminal procedure norms common to all courts on the basis of common and general principles.

Currently, 151 military courts operate in the military-judicial system (including 13 district courts and 138 courts of garrisons and missile armies). Five military vessels operate outside the Russian Federation (Georgia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Transdniestria). More than 20 thousand criminal cases are considered annually by military courts.

A striking indicator of the democratization of society, including the Armed Forces, is the fact that military courts consider complaints of military personnel about illegal actions of military command bodies and military officials that violate their rights and freedoms. The number of such complaints is growing from year to year: if, for example, in 1997 military courts considered 21,386 complaints, then only in the first half of 1998 - already 22,686.

More than 85 percent of the complaints filed were recognized by the military courts as justified and satisfied the legitimate demands of the servicemen. These results indicate that a significant number of violations of the law that infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of military personnel are allowed in the military. All categories of military personnel apply to the courts for restoration of their violated rights, and today applying for help to this legal institution is the only real way to protect their rights.

Yes, the conditions of recent years have been very difficult for military vessels. In addition to the difficulties common to the whole country-economic instability, underfunding, deterioration of the criminal situation, weakness of law enforcement agencies-important issues for military courts have not yet been resolved by law. The draft law "On military courts", for example, is stuck in the corridors of the Federal Assembly. Nevertheless, there is no crisis situation in military courts. On the contrary, the staff remains stable, and, consequently, there are conditions for maintaining a sufficiently high level of judicial work.

This was achieved because much has been done to improve the financial situation of military judges, which really ensures their independence. Military judges have a decent salary and lifelong maintenance after their discharge, insurance guarantees, and relatively well-provided housing.

Today, the system of military courts employs highly qualified officers with good theoretical knowledge and life experience, who know the life of the army and navy. A sure sign of professionalism is reflected, in particular, in strict adherence to the spirit and letter of the procedural law when considering court cases. This characteristic feature of military court proceedings is always noted by the lawyers involved in the proceedings. The undoubted merit in this is primarily due to the chairmen of military courts. I would like to especially mention the heads of military courts of the district level A. Vasyagin, V. Gorobets, A. Khomyakov. The chairmen of military courts of garrisons and associations deserve kind words for their work: A. Beskostnykh, S. Denisenko, A. Dyachenko, A. Efanov, M. Korotkov, N. Kortavenkov, V. Manylov, P. Paleev, G. Snarsky, G. Sologub, A. Kharchenko.

But it would be wrong not to point out the existing shortcomings in the work of military courts, which all of us still have a lot of work to do. Perhaps the most serious problem is the violation of the legal deadlines for consideration of court cases for subjective reasons. Simply put, due to the insufficiently responsible attitude of some judges and chairmen to their duties. Due to the poor organization of work in some courts, a number of cases were not scheduled for consideration for months. Sometimes even in cases where the accused were held in custody. There are some cases of direct red tape.

This suggests that the high guarantees of independence that protect judges from possible influence on them are not combined with the same high level of responsibility for each of their actions and decisions. The instrument of influence on the judge should be a qualification panel of judges with sufficient powers. We have to admit, however, that the qualification boards in military courts are not yet very active and decisive. It is also one of our tasks to increase their role and importance.

In the near future, we will have to resolve organizational and personnel issues related to changes in the structure of military courts, which will follow changes in the military-administrative division of the Russian Federation and in the relevant structures of the Ministry of Defense. The Department of Military Courts, for its part, will do everything in its power to ensure that the legitimate interests of each military judge affected are taken into account as much as possible.

Analyzing the eighty-year history of military courts, we must understand that their future largely depends on a high level of justice, on further professional development of military judges, and on the effectiveness of the results of our common work. We have great opportunities to improve it, and the task is to make sure that everyone tries to implement them in their own place.

Permanent link to this publication: