Review

The article is devoted to the problem of the quality of criminal procedural decisions (СPD).

Depending on the degree, that CPD fulfill with the corresponding normative prescriptions (high quality standards) it should be allocated to such level of quality CPR: good-quality; sufficiently high quality; satisfactory quality; partly poor quality; quite poor quality.

The fairness seems as more correct criterion of substantial violations made while making the final CPD. The fairness is complex estimated concept that integrates the overall meaningful quality of CPD. This requires a balanced approach to the estimating of committed violations from the angle of their possible impact on the overall fairness of the final decision on the case (method «fairness of the proceeding taken as a whole»).

Estimating of CPD quality by certain procedural participators on different stages and choosing appropriate responses in case of any quality defects should be given from the angle their harmful for the rights and legitimate interests of the trial participators and the other tasks of the criminal proceedings.

Violations of corresponding normative prescriptions are significant in a case of making certain harm or a threat of harm for the rights and legitimate interests of participators, including due legal procedure, other tasks of the proceedings, particularly an effective investigation or trial. Enough flexible is minimum limit of CPD fulfill with the corresponding illegal standards, without which it is impossible to admit due legal quality of the act. It is noted that current criminal procedural legislation does not provide exhaustive criteria for the implementation of the CPD check perfect in terms of its legal definition quality, the latter should be the subject of further research of science.

Keywords: the degrees of quality, good quality, quality, criminal procedural decisions, quality standards, the person adopting decisions.