Legal issue: constitutionality of regulation guaranteeing the right of the victim of crime or his representative to take part in court hearings in which the issue of parole (conditional early release from prison) of the offender is being considered and making the notification of the victim or his representative a precondition of such consideration (even in cases when the court sees no need of receiving an additional information from the victim).
Ratio decidendi: the contested provisions contradict the Constitution. The Constitutional and procedural legal status of the victim implies his right to set out for the court his view regarding the issue of the offender’s parole. However, the realisation of this right should not violate the principle of procedural economy, that is, lead to a significant procrastination in consideration of parole applications and, as a result, to exceedingly long uncertainty for the offender as to his legal status. But the current regulation does not enable to solve the problem of notifying the victim or his representative at their actual address about the date, time and place of court hearings, as well as the problem of confirming the fact that such information has been received by them. In this way the contested regulation obstructs the timely decision by the court of the issue of parole on its merits and thus violates the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
The Court prescribed to the federal legislator to make necessary amendments and determined a provisional procedure of notification which shall apply until such amendments are made.
