Omsk, Russian Federation
A judge’s belief is a result of a multifaceted cognitive process influenced by a combination of factors. It sprouts from a comprehensive and complete examination of evidence and allows the judge to make a fair, legitimate, and informed decision. As trial participants exercise their procedural rights to make the judge decide in their favor, they use various methods to shape the judge’s belief. The article describes the influence of trial participants on the judge’s belief, as well as the actions that can affect it. It touches upon the legal foundations of judge’s belief in shaping the final decision, the circle of stakeholders, the role of the lawyer, the assessment of the influence of trial participants, and its positive and negative consequences. Other issues include the limits of participants’ influence on the judge’s belief, as well as the possibility and expediency of additional restrictions on this influence in the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The author argues for the shortcomings of the civil procedure legislation in terms of providing opportunities for trial participants to influence the judge’s belief. A set of cases made it possible to develop a general assessment of the legislation and practice in the sphere of judge’s belief, as well as to develop a number of measures to eliminate the existing regulatory deficiencies.
a lawyer’s influence, a judge’s belief, motives behind a judge’s decision, judicial discretion, participants in civil trial, shaping a judge’s belief, evaluation of evidence, justice
1. Kiprushenkova N. F. Internal conviction of the court as one of the reasons for arbitrary evaluation of evidence. Vestnik magistratury, 2022, (11-1): 42–43. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/xcnqmg
2. Shabanov P. N. Internal belief of the judge. Proceedings of VSU. Series: Law, 2010, (1): 129–138. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/musonr
3. Zhogin N. V. Theory of evidence in the Soviet criminal process. Moscow: Iuridicheskaia literatura, 1973, 736. (In Russ.)
4. Onosov Yu. V. On law enforcement discretion in the court's assessment of evidence in a legal case. Tomsk State University Journal of Law, 2023, (47): 162–171. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/22253513/47/11
5. Veretennikova E. V. Subjective and objective factors of inner judge conviction at an estimation of evidence. Siberian Law Herald, 2011, (3): 95–100. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/nyojnb
6. Khoroshilov A. S., Azizov A. A. Internal conviction as a tool for evaluating evidence in civil proceedings. Voprosy rossijskoj justicii, 2020, (7): 634–641. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/megtuw
7. Sadivankin S. G. Factors influencing the formation of internal beliefs in the evaluation of evidence. Problems of the development of criminal procedure legislation at the present stage, ed. Shafer S. A. Samara: Samara University, 2002, 141–146. (In Russ.) URL: http://repo.ssau.ru/handle/Problemy-razvitiya-ugolovnoprocessualnogo-zakonodatelstva/Faktory-vliyaushie-na-formirovanie-vnutrennego-ubezhdeniya-pri-ocenke-dokazatelstv-81268 (accessed 10 Apr 2025).
8. Boldyreva N. N. A judge’s dissenting opinion in civil proceedings. Auditorium, 2014, (2): 155–157. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/sqydsz
9. Shcheglov V. N. Subjects of the judicial civil process: Lectures for students. Tomsk: Tomsk University, 1979, 130. (In Russ.)
10. Mokhov A. A., Vorontsova I. V., Semenova S. Y. Civil procedure (civil procedural law) of Russia. Moscow: Contract, 2017, 384. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/yxdxti
11. Tumanova L. V. Subjects of civil procedural legal relations: Traditions and innovations. Bulletin of Moscow Witte University. Series 2: Legal science, 2023, (3): 52–57. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21777/2587-9472-2023-3-52-57
12. Zvyagina N. S. The role of the court in minimizing procedural risks in a civil case. Proceedings of VSU. Series: Law, 2019, (1): 124–134. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/tjvnph
13. Kagirova A. H. Psychology of interpersonal interaction in the civil process. Makhachkala: DSU, 2021, 57. (In Russ.)
14. Novitsky V. A. Judicial reasoning as an independent means of evidence. Procedural actions of a verbal nature: Proc. Conf., St. Petersburg, 18–19 Nov 2016. St. Petersburg: North-Western branch of RSUJ, 2017, 128–133. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ylxhaj
15. Shinkaruk V. M. The importance of expert opinion for forming moral certainty of parties to a trial. Legal Concept, 2024, 23(4): 188–193. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15688/lc.jvolsu.2024.4.24
16. Kosoy V. A. Inner conviction of judge. Modern Law, 2013, (4): 97–101. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/pysdop
17. Kleandrov M. I. To the possibility of hypnotic influence on a judge in the administration of justice. Russian judge, 2006, (1): 41–45. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/kxdtyz
18. Rudenko A. V., Pyatnitsa E. Yu. To the relevance of the problem of psychological influence on the judge in the arbitration process. Humanities, socio-economic and social sciences, 2019, (4): 154–156. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.23672/SAE.2019.2019.29099/
19. Merenkov I. V. Obtaining evidence at the request of the court and at the request of the court and at the request of the advocate in civil cases. Herald of Omsk University. Series: Law, 2023, 20(3): 71–80. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24147/1990-5173.2023.20(3).71-80
20. Ivanov A. V. Lawyer’s request: The content and implementation problems. Advocate, 2014, (4): 5–20. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/sarjgj
21. Abrashin A. A. The role of a lawyer in collecting and disclosing evidence in a civil case. Civil Law: Law and Process, 2022, (4): 134–138. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/tupwfh
22. Vasiliev V. L. Legal psychology. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2012, 608. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/sdrqdr
23. Terekhin V. A. Ensuring the independence of the court is a priority area of judicial and legal policy. Russian justice, 2009, (10): 6–11. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/kzbdlj
24. Etina T. S. Extra-processual recourses to court: Questions of legal regulation. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2015, (2-2): 232–237. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ttujit
25. Pyatnitsa E. Y. Unacceptable influence of stakeholders on the formation of the judge’s belief. Humanities, socio-economic and social sciences, 2018, (12): 156–158. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.23672/SAE.2018.12.23707
26. Trezubov E. S., Shcheglova N. S. Fictitiousness of civil procedure: Constitutive sings and mechanisms of prohibiting abuse of procedural rights in the Russian Federation. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2013, (3-1): 287–292. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/pkdfsl
