Abstract: The article is devoted to certain issues of the participation of an interpreter in criminal proceedings. The object of the research is the social relations that arise in connection with the involvement of an interpreter to participate in criminal proceedings. The subject of this article is the provisions of the criminal procedure law related to the implementation of the principle of the language of criminal proceedings and regulating the participation of an interpreter in the criminal process, as well as scientifically based positions of scientists in this area, the problems of insufficient regulation of determining the legal status and participation of an interpreter, in a historical context, the history of the appearance of an interpreter in the criminal proceedings of Russia is studied, an analysis of changes that affect his competence is carried out, a comparative analysis of foreign legislation in criminal proceedings is also carried out (on the example of some foreign countries - Great Britain, France, Germany).The work uses general scientific and particular scientific methods, namely: system-structural, comparison, generalization, logical-legal analysis, historical. As a result of the study, the author substantiates the conclusion that in order to improve the legal regulation of the participation of an interpreter in the criminal process in Russia, some procedural issues of participation and the procedure for involving an interpreter in the criminal process, established in the study of foreign legislation, and comparison, should be taken into account when improving Russian legislation. In particular, when studying a candidate for translator by an investigator, it is proposed to take into account the translator's knowledge of legal terminology. Also, the need to involve two interpreters, in the event of a conflict of interests of the suspect, the accused, the appointment in court of a new interpreter who has not previously participated in pre-trial proceedings.

Abstract: The article analyzes the provisions of the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation and other legislative acts in the field of criminal process, regulating the pool of participants of investigative activities organized in accordance with the ruling of the court, and the problems of absence of a procedural status of some persons. The author considers the issues of their participation and the procedure of them using their rights. The article reveals the problems of an insufficient regulation of the status of persons participating in such investigative activities as search of dwellings without the inhabitants’ consent at the stage of a criminal case initiation; search of dwelling, and seizure in dwelling at the stage of a pre-trial investigation. The author uses such methods as dialectical, general scientific method, formal-logical, and system-structural. The author substantiates the conclusion that it is not reasonable to extend the list of participants of the criminal process and include into the list all persons involved in investigative activities requiring the ruling of the court. The absence of a particular article for each particular person involved in investigative activities does not mean this person has no right to defend their rights and lawful interests in criminal proceedings. Based on the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the author forms the list of fundamental rights and duties of a person without a status of a participant of criminal proceedings who is involved in investigative activities requiring the ruling of the court. The author suggests specifying a procedural status of a forensic investigator, formulates the definition of a lawful representative of a person the court decision about a compulsory treatment is being made on. The author suggests including the list of persons possessing a right to complain to the court, apart from a complainant, persons who turned themselves in and persons subject to the investigation upon a report of a crime, into one of the resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court.