Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The uncertainties existing in the wording of Article 412.5 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are considered: when deciding on the transfer of a supervisory complaint to the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation: 1) is it the right or duty of a judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation to request a criminal case? 2) is a judge authorized to request other materials, familiarization with which helps to identify significant violations of criminal or criminal procedure law? The research methodology is determined by the specifics of the chosen subject. A systematic approach was used; methods: axioteleological, formal-logical, comparison method. At the stage of preliminary consideration of a supervisory complaint, it is the right to make a request for a criminal case, and not the duty of a Judge of the Supreme Court. In order to establish the presence (absence) of a significant violation of the law (criminal or criminal procedure), if there is a need to claim heterogeneous materials, the expediency of making a decision on sending a complaint for permission to a court session of the Presidium of the Supreme Court is justified. The author’s version of the norm is proposed.
Yaremenko et al. (Sat,) studied this question.