Translate this page:
Nota Bene. Books, journals, publishing technologies.
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate ☒
Library
 Your profile
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

The principle of objective truth in the activities of the Prosecutor's Office

Kovalev Artem Aleksandrovich

PhD in Law

Associate Professor, Department of Prosecutorial Activity, Ural State Law University

620137, Russia, Sverdlovskaya oblast', g. Ekaterinburg, ul. Komsomol'skaya, 21

artem.kovalev.1978.kovalev@mail.ru
Other publications by this author
 
 

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0706.2022.2.37455

Received:

01-02-2022

Published:

21-02-2022

Abstract: The subject of the study are materials of prosecutorial, law enforcement and judicial practice, norms of procedural legislation and legislation on the prosecutor's office regulating these public relations, as well as positions formed on the issue of the essence of the principle of objective truth and its implementation in the activities of the prosecutor's office and the court. The object of research in the article is social relations arising from the implementation of the principle of objective truth in the implementation of supervisory and non-supervisory activities by prosecutors. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as the nature of the truth established in the course of law enforcement, the ratio of reliability and probability, as well as the inclusion in the principle of legal assessment of existing facts.   The principle of objective truth has been given attention in the scientific literature, but this principle has been investigated in relation to the administration of justice. Meanwhile, the implementation of the principle is undoubtedly important in the implementation of prosecutorial and other law enforcement activities, however, it has not been studied before in relation to the activities of the prosecutor's office; this is the novelty of the study. In the course of the study, the views of scientists on the existence of the principle of objective truth, the main aspects of its content were studied, as a result of which the definition of the principle of objective truth in the activities of the prosecutor's office was proposed and the conclusion was formulated that the consolidation of this principle in the Law on the Prosecutor's Office will fill the gaps in the legal regulation of the exercise of prosecutorial powers in other areas of prosecutorial activity and it will prevent the adoption of unreasonable decisions that are possible if this principle is not observed, which, in turn, can lead to a violation of the principle of legality, which is a special contribution of the author to the study of this topic.

Keywords:

prosecutor, the principle of objective truth, powers of the prosecutor, administration of justice, legal assessment, The Law on the Prosecutor's Office, circumstances of the case, the principle of legality, implementation of supervision, participation in court
This article is automatically translated.

It is obvious that the implementation of the principle of objective truth in the activities of the Prosecutor's office is a prerequisite for achieving the main goal of its activities – ensuring the rule of law, protecting human and civil rights and freedoms, the interests of society and the state, and therefore this principle should be reflected in the Law on the Prosecutor's Office.

References
1. Ergashev E.R. Principles of prosecutorial supervisory and protective law and its institutions: Dis. ... doct. jurid. sciences'. Yekaterinburg, 2008. p. 146.
2. Official Internet portal of legal information http://www.pravo.gov.ru , (accessed 02.02.2022).
3. Explanatory Note "To the draft of the new Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation" // SPS Consultant Plus.
4. Samolin V. Definition of leaving the application without movement // Legality. 2002. N 4. pp. 39-40.
5. Zhuikov V.M. Judicial reform: problems of access to justice. M.: Statute, 2006. 283 p.
6. Skoblikov P.A. Intersectoral and intra-sectoral prejudice of sentences and related judicial acts // Law. 2013. N 8. pp. 59-65.
7. Vaskovsky E.V. Course of civil procedure: Subjects and objects of the process, procedural relations and actions. M.: Statute, 2016. 624 p.
8. Eliseikin P.F. Subject, principles and subjects of Soviet civil procedural law: Textbook. Yaroslavl, 1980. 44 p .
9. Report of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation dated 02/21/2014 "Report of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation for 2013" // SPS Consultant Plus.
10. Explanatory dictionary of Ushakov D.N. // https://gufo.me/dict/ushakov (accessed 02.02.2022).
11. Shumilova L.F. Principles of competition and objective truth as fundamental principles of law enforcement practice // Journal of Russian Law. 2005. N 11. pp.54-61
12. Voronov A.F. Principles of civil procedure: past, present, future. M.: Gorodets, 2009. 494 p.
13. Ivanov O.V. Objective truth in the Soviet civil process: Abstract. dis. ... cand. jurid. M., 1964. 24 p.
14. Karpysheva Yu.O. Involvement of representatives of other state bodies by the prosecutor in the verification of the execution of laws // Legality. 2020. N 9. pp. 27-29.
15. Plugar D.M. Questions of procedural conditions for conducting prosecutorial inspections // Legality. 2019. N 8. pp. 33-37.
16. Avdyukov M. G. The principle of legality in civil proceedings. Moscow: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1970. 203 p.
17. Komissarov K. I. Tasks of judicial supervision in the field of civil proceedings. Sverdlovsk, 1971. 167 p.
18. Bonner A.T. Problems of establishing the truth in civil proceedings: monograph. St. Petersburg: University Publishing Consortium "Law Book", 2009. 832 p.
19. Gurevich M. A. The principle of objective truth of Soviet civil procedural law // Soviet state and law. 1964. No.9. pp. 98-107;
20. Zeider N. B. Judgment in a civil case. Moscow: Jurid. lit., 1966. 190 p.;
21. Samsonov N.V. The principle of objective truth in modern administrative and civil proceedings // Administrative law and process. 2019. N 2. pp. 26-29.
22. Alekseev S.S. General theory of law. M., 2008. 565 p.
23. Yudelson K.S. Soviet civil procedure. M., 1956. 439 p.
24. Balakshin V. The truth in the criminal process // Russian Justice. 1998. N 2. pp. 18-19.
25. Tadevosyan V.S. On the question of establishing material truth in the Soviet process // Soviet State and law. 1948. N 6. pp. 68-69.
26. Kurylev S.V. On reliability and probability in justice // Pravovedenie. 1968. N 1. pp. 63-74.
27. Instruction of the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia dated 03/19/2020 N 175/7 "On strengthening the prosecutor's supervision over the implementation of legislation in the field of road safety // Legality. 2020. N 4. p.57.
28. Order of the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia dated 16.01.2014 N 6 "On the organization of supervision over the execution of laws by the administrations of institutions and bodies executing criminal penalties, pre-trial detention facilities when suspects and accused of committing crimes are detained" // Legality, 2014. N 4. P.56

Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

A REVIEW of an article on the topic "The principle of objective truth in the activities of the prosecutor's office." The subject of the study. The article proposed for review is devoted to topical issues of the implementation of the principle of objective truth in the activities of the prosecutor's office. The author analyzes legislation and theory for the possibility of recognizing the principle of objective truth in them in order to implement the tasks of the prosecutor's office. The subject of the study was the norms of legislation and various legal acts, as well as the opinions of scientists. Research methodology. The purpose of the study is not stated directly in the article. At the same time, it can be clearly understood from the title and content of the work. The purpose can be designated as the consideration and resolution of certain problematic aspects of the issue of the possibility of recognizing the principle of objective truth in the activities of the prosecutor's office. Based on the set goals and objectives, the author has chosen the methodological basis of the study. In particular, the author uses a set of general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, analogy, deduction, induction, and others. In particular, the methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to summarize and share the conclusions of various scientific approaches to the proposed topic, as well as draw specific conclusions from the doctrinal literature. The most important role was played by special legal methods. In particular, the author actively applied the formal legal method, which made it possible to analyze and interpret the norms of current legislation (in particular, the provisions of legal acts regulating the activities of the prosecutor's office). Thus, the following conclusion is important in the context of the purpose of the study: "Speaking about the implementation of the principle of objective truth in prosecutorial activity, it is worth noting that although the Law on the Prosecutor's Office does not enshrine this principle, its implementation underlies the activities of the prosecutor's office. This can be seen in many departmental acts of the Prosecutor General. Thus, the Order of the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia dated 30.01.2013 No. 45 speaks about the mandatory objective resolution of each appeal received by the prosecutor's office." Among the methods used by the author of the article, it should be noted the historical-legal method, which allowed us to compare the legislation of different historical periods. Thus, the article states that "The denial of the principle is based on the analysis of Article 14 of the Civil Procedure Code of the RSFSR, according to which the court was obliged to take measures to comprehensively and fully clarify the actual circumstances of the case, which, in turn, led to a weakening of the principle of competition [3]; the modern Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not mentions the obligation of the court to take measures to clarify the circumstances of the case. Modern researchers also conclude that the existence of this principle is currently impossible, due to the fact that it has been superseded by the principle of dispositivity [4,5,6]." Thus, the methodology chosen by the author is fully adequate to the purpose of the study, allows you to study all aspects of the topic in its entirety. Relevance. The relevance of the stated issues is beyond doubt. There are both theoretical and practical aspects of the significance of the proposed topic. From the point of view of theory, the topic of the implementation of the principle of objective truth in the activities of the prosecutor's office is complex and multifaceted. Usually, the problems of objective truth are considered from the point of view of the court (this is correctly written in the article), but, of course, the principle should be reflected in the activities of other public authorities. Thus, it is necessary to consider, firstly, whether such a principle can exist for such bodies, secondly, what is the content of the principle of objective truth, and thirdly, whether there is a difference when using the principle of objective truth for the court and for other public authorities. On the practical side, it should be recognized that problems often arise in the implementation of legislation by the prosecutor's office. Looking at it through the lens of the principle of objective truth could help solve these problems. Thus, scientific research in the proposed field should only be welcomed. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of the proposed article is beyond doubt. Firstly, it is expressed in the author's specific conclusions. Among them, for example, is the following conclusion: "in the activities of the prosecutor's office, this principle is a guiding principle that determines the need to take all measures provided for by law to establish the factual circumstances of the case and their legal assessment. It is obvious that the implementation of the principle of objective truth in the activities of the prosecutor's office is a necessary condition for achieving the main goal of its activities – ensuring the rule of law, protecting human and civil rights and freedoms, the interests of society and the state, and therefore this principle should be reflected in the Law on the Prosecutor's Office." These and other theoretical conclusions can be used in further scientific research. Secondly, the author suggests ideas for generalizing and interpreting the current Russian legislation on the prosecutor's office from the point of view of the principle of objective truth. A number of the author's statements are controversial, but certainly deserve attention and can be the subject of fruitful discussions in the future. Thus, the materials of the article may be of particular interest to the scientific community in terms of contributing to the development of science. Style, structure, and content. The subject of the article corresponds to the specialization of the journal "Law and Politics", as it is devoted to legal problems related to the definition of the rights and duties of prosecutors in the exercise of their activities, the implementation of the principles of law in the activities of the prosecutor's office as a state body. The content of the article fully corresponds to the title, since the author considered the stated problems and achieved the research goal. The quality of the presentation of the study and its results should be recognized as fully positive. The subject, objectives, methodology and main results of the study follow directly from the text of the article. The design of the work generally meets the requirements for this kind of work. No significant violations of these requirements were found. Bibliography. The quality of the literature used should be highly appreciated. The author actively uses the literature presented by authors from Russia (Ergashev E.R., Samolin V., Skoblikov P.A., Eliseikin P.F., Voronov A.F., Karpysheva Yu.O. and others). I would like to note the use by the author of a large number of legal acts, which made it possible to give the study a focus on solving specific problems in the interpretation of current legislation. Thus, the works of the above authors correspond to the research topic, have a sign of sufficiency, and contribute to the disclosure of various aspects of the topic. Appeal to opponents. The author conducted a serious analysis of the current state of the problem under study. All quotes from scientists are accompanied by author's comments. That is, the author shows different points of view on the problem and tries to argue for a more correct one in his opinion. Conclusions, the interest of the readership. The conclusions are fully logical, as they are obtained using a generally accepted methodology. The article may be of interest to the readership in terms of the systematic positions of the author in relation to the issues of the operation of the principle of objective truth in Russia. Based on the above, summing up all the positive and negative sides of the article, "I recommend publishing"
Nota Bene
 
For authors
 
Other
 
Our sites
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.