The Nature of the Judicial Mistake in Criminal Proceedings, the Processing of Corrections and Disciplinary Liability

The Constitution of our country in art. 118 proclaims that justice is exercised only by the court. Therefore, a person can count on restoring justice in the courts. It is they who, in defending the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of each, should serve the public interest, which has as its goal the creation of the necessary guarantees for everyone. Justice, in fact, is a mirror of the state in which it is carried out. If the state power is weak, society is hurt, then justice ceases to be objective, legal and fair. A society that does not believe in a fair trial and can not rely on it is slowly but surely slipping into social anomie. One of the reasons for the decline of the authority of the judiciary in the society are judicial errors. The frequency of judicial errors and changes in the decision in a higher instance is an indicator of the effectiveness of justice for civil society. Judicial errors are the category that helps to describe the scope of unrealized responsibility of the judiciary as applied to those who applied for justice, and in relation to the obligations of constitutional institutions of power to recognize, secure and protect rights and freedoms. The problem of prevention and elimination of judicial errors is always relevant, since each of them reduces the effectiveness of the judicial system as a whole, and in some cases such protection is generally inaccessible. In this connection, the establishment of the nature, causes and grounds for the adoption of erroneous judicial acts, as well as the conditions and methods for their elimination, is one of the main prerequisites for improving judicial activity. In this regard, it is impossible to ignore the grounds and limits of the admissibility of disciplinary liability of judges. The judge can not be brought to any responsibility for the essence of the decision - this is an expression of judicial indemnity.