Açıqlama:

The article examines the judicial practice of refusing to grant defence motions as a systemic indicator of procedural imbalance in criminal proceedings. It is argued that formally lawful court decisions, expressed through the refusal to satisfy procedural initiatives of the defence, when persistent and typical in nature, are transformed into a mechanism of institutional restriction of the right to defence and undermine the principles of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms. Based on the criminal procedure legislation and judicial practice of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the study identifies typical grounds for such refusals, analyses their reasoning, and assesses their compliance with international standards of a fair trial. An empirical model of quantitative and qualitative analysis of refusals to grant defence motions is proposed, enabling the identification of structural defects in law enforcement. The frequency, nature, and reasoning of judicial refusals to grant defence motions should be regarded as indicators of procedural imbalance in criminal proceedings, reflecting structural inequality between the parties.