ON THE ROLE OF THE RESULTS OF OPERATIONAL SEARCH ACTIVITIES IN CONTEMPORARY CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

M. V. Nazarov
{"title":"ON THE ROLE OF THE RESULTS OF OPERATIONAL SEARCH ACTIVITIES IN CONTEMPORARY CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS","authors":"M. V. Nazarov","doi":"10.5922/sikbfu-2022-4-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the analysis of the place and role of operational-­investigative activities results (hereinafter — ORD) in modern criminal procedural law. The views established in science regarding the use of materials obtained in the course of conducting operational-­search activities (hereinafter referred to as ORM), as well as existing law enforcement realities, correlate with the views established in science regarding the use in criminal procedural evidence obtained during the conduct of operational-­search activities (hereinafter referred to as ORM). The article reveals the inconsistencies between the theoretical provisions and the requirements put forward by objective reality to expand the practice of using the capabilities of the operational units of the inquiry bodies for the purposes of criminal proceedings. The author aims to establish the reasons for the skeptical attitude of process scientists to the ORD results and substantiates the provisions on the leading role of the court, the prosecutor’s office as independent guarantors of human rights and a citizen in the implementation of individual ORM. Methodologically, research relied on the dialectical method of scientific knowledge, logical, comparative legal methods, as well as observation and other particular methods of studying legal phenomena. The research used doctrinal sources, as well as domestic legislation as the sources of study material. Conceptual proposals were put forward to improve the theory of criminal justice, with the aim of its rational updating, as well as possible ways to improve the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.","PeriodicalId":104739,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik of Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University Series Humanities and social science","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik of Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University Series Humanities and social science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5922/sikbfu-2022-4-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of the place and role of operational-­investigative activities results (hereinafter — ORD) in modern criminal procedural law. The views established in science regarding the use of materials obtained in the course of conducting operational-­search activities (hereinafter referred to as ORM), as well as existing law enforcement realities, correlate with the views established in science regarding the use in criminal procedural evidence obtained during the conduct of operational-­search activities (hereinafter referred to as ORM). The article reveals the inconsistencies between the theoretical provisions and the requirements put forward by objective reality to expand the practice of using the capabilities of the operational units of the inquiry bodies for the purposes of criminal proceedings. The author aims to establish the reasons for the skeptical attitude of process scientists to the ORD results and substantiates the provisions on the leading role of the court, the prosecutor’s office as independent guarantors of human rights and a citizen in the implementation of individual ORM. Methodologically, research relied on the dialectical method of scientific knowledge, logical, comparative legal methods, as well as observation and other particular methods of studying legal phenomena. The research used doctrinal sources, as well as domestic legislation as the sources of study material. Conceptual proposals were put forward to improve the theory of criminal justice, with the aim of its rational updating, as well as possible ways to improve the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.
论行动搜查活动结果在当代刑事诉讼中的作用
本文分析了侦查活动结果在现代刑事诉讼法中的地位和作用。科学上关于在开展行动搜查活动(以下简称ORM)过程中获得的材料的使用的观点,以及现有的执法现实,与科学上关于在开展行动搜查活动(以下简称ORM)过程中获得的刑事程序证据的使用的观点相关联。本文揭示了理论规定与客观现实提出的要求之间的不一致,以扩大利用侦查机关业务单位能力为刑事诉讼目的的实践。作者的目的是确定程序科学家对人权观察结果持怀疑态度的原因,并证实关于法院、检察官办公室作为人权的独立保障者和公民在执行个人人权观察方面发挥主导作用的规定。在方法论上,研究依靠科学知识的辩证方法、逻辑方法、比较法律方法以及观察等研究法律现象的特殊方法。该研究使用了理论来源以及国内立法作为研究材料的来源。提出了完善刑事司法理论的概念性建议,以期对刑事司法理论进行合理更新,并提出了完善俄罗斯刑事诉讼法的可能途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信