CURRENT ISSUES OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2023-4-187-191Keywords:
proof, subject of proof, limits of proof, evidence, criminal proceedings, actor of proof.Abstract
This article examines the issues related to the definition of the concept of evidence, as well as the conceptual challenges that arise during the implementation of evidence in the criminal process. It has been found that the evidentiary process as a cognitive-evidential activity in criminal proceedings serves as the basis for the correct decision of each proceeding on the merits and the solution of the tasks set before the Ukrainian state. It was also established that there are no objective grounds for changing the definition of evidence established in the theory of the criminal process, which defines it as a cognitive activity of authorized subjects in a specific procedural form. The term "evidence" is a legal and procedural term with its own specificity. The issue of the subject of proof was analyzed and its structure was determined. In the theory of criminal procedural evidence, the concept of the subject of evidence is considered key, as it determines what exactly must be proven in criminal proceedings. This refers to a set of real-world phenomena, the knowledge of which is necessary to achieve the goal of criminal justice. The concept of "proof" is also inextricably linked with another term – "limits of proof", which is introduced to ensure the reliability of establishing circumstances that are important in a criminal investigation. The article also considers approaches to understanding the essence and range of subjects of criminal procedural evidence. It is emphasized that determining the correct limits of proof is a key element in establishing all the circumstances that need to be proven in criminal proceedings. Mistakes in determining these limits can lead to either an infinite or an incomplete establishment of the facts to be proved. The effectiveness of a quick, complete and objective investigation and trial depends on the correct formulation of the subject matter and the limits of proof. Despite the importance of these legal aspects in the practice of the criminal process, they do not have a clear legal definition.
References
1. Кримінальний процесуальний кодекс України від 13.04.2012. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-17#Text (дата звернення: 30.11.2023).
2. Стахівський С. М. Теорія і практика кримінально-процесуального доказування : монограф. Київ : Нац. акад. внутр. справ. України, 2005. 272 с.
3. Лобойко Л. М. Кримінально-процесуальне право : навч. посіб. Київ : Істина, 2014. 432 с.
4. Рибалка О. Теоретичні засади доказування в кримінальному процесі. Підприємництво, господарство і право. 2020. № 8. С. 281–284.
5. Козаченко О. В. Кримінальний процес : конспект лекцій. Миколаїв : Іліон, 2016. 319 с.
6. Гнатенко В. С. Межі доказування у кримінальному провадженні : автореф. дис. … канд. юрид. наук : 12.00.09 / Донецьк. юрид. ін-т МВС України. Кривий Ріг, 2017. 16 с.
7. Компанець Є. М. Суб’єкти доказування у кримінальних провадженнях про порушення прав інтелектуальної власності. Нове українське право. 2021. № 4. С. 227–236..