Ruling of the Constitutional Court of 4 June 2013 № 900-O on the refusal to accept for consideration the complaints of the citizen Tamara Chirkova against the violation of her constitutional rights by the provisions of Article 30.1 of the Code of Administrative Offences 

Legal issue: the constitutionality of provisions which deprive close relatives of the deceased of the right to challenge termination of proceedings in a case on administrative offence in which he was involved – whether such provisions violate the presumption of innocence and the right to judicial protection, and whether they accord to constitutional requirements as to the protection of honour, dignity and good name. 
Ratio decidendi: the Court refused to consider the case, saying that the Code of Administrative Offences, unlike the criminal procedural law, does not distinguish between rehabilitating and non-rehabilitating grounds for the termination of proceedings. Consequently, by virtue of the presumption of innocence the person, with regard to whom the case on administrative offence has been closed, is considered to be not guilty, that is, the State no longer questions his status as  a non-guilty person. Hereby a balance of constitutionally protected interests is achieved, and the lack of the right to challenge the decision terminating proceedings against a deceased spouse of the applicant with regard to an administrative offence may not be regarded as a violation of applicants constitutional rights.

Dissenting opinion:
  • In this case neither the refutation of the information contained in the decision on the termination of the proceedings in question by way of bringing a suit nor the application of the persons concerned to the procuracy with the request to bring a protest against such decision may not be regarded as a legal remedy – given that the relatives of the deceased have their own interest in conclusive refutation of officially announced suspicion towards the deceased in the commission of the offence.

  • In this case the Court ought to apply its legal position worked out earlier with regard to criminal prosecution  (Judgment of 14 July 2011 N 16-П). Both situations are common in there being a recognised lawful interest of closed relatives of a deceased person, which may consist in their desire to defend the honour and dignity of the deceased and his good memory, as well as their own honour and dignity, which suffer as a result of an uncertainty as to the legal status of the deceased.
Document (725.49 Kb)
Subject area:
Public Law administrative liability