The article presents a comparative legal analysis of the legislative regulation concerning the use of a preventive measure in the form of detention in relation to suspects or accused individuals involved in committing crimes related to entrepreneurial and other economic activities. The study highlights the specific mechanisms for applying this preventive measure in various jurisdictions, both within neighboring countries and far abroad. Based on the results of a comparative analysis, it was concluded that only in some neighboring countries the legislator has provided for specifics when choosing to place in custody entrepreneurs or other persons engaged in economic activities. In contrast, non-CIS countries maintain a more traditional and historical approach to the regulation of preventive measures. Notably, criminal procedural legislations in Germany, France, England, and China lack special norms designed to offer additional guarantees for entrepreneurs or those involved in economic activities. The analysis made it possible to identify some features of the regulation of the use of preventive measures in the laws of foreign countries, which may be of interest to the domestic legislator when developing measures aimed at improving the mechanism for applying preventive measures against individual entrepreneurs and persons who are members of the management body of a commercial organization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Evgenii T. Prilepskii (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: