Abstract: This article analyzes the problems of implementation of the right of access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The author carefully examines the legislation of the countries of post-Soviet space on filing a complaint against actions (omissions), as well as decisions of the prosecuting agency in pretrial proceedings. The subject of this research is the norms of the Russian and foreign legislation that regulate the right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the right of access to justice. The article employs the universal systemic method of cognition; comparative-legal, formal-legal, and statistical methods; as well as logical analysis of the normative legal acts. It is indicated that restriction of the access to justice for consideration of the criminal procedure dispute in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is also established by the practice developed in law enforcement for evaluation of the complaint prior to its consideration involving  the parties with the possibility of making a decision on whether to remit or reject the complaint in the absence of legislatively specified grounds, which directly affects the number of addressed complaints. The conclusion is made on the need to specify the grounds for remitting the complaint of an applicant filed in accordance with the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, for the purpose of excluding the possibility of decision made by the court that is not based on the law on remitting or rejecting the complaint for consideration (the Article 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).

Abstract: This article analyzes the problems of exercising the right of access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation. The author examines the legislation of post-Soviet countries in terms of provision the access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation. The subject of this research is the norms of Russian and foreign legislation that regulate to right of access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object of this research is the legal relations that emerge in implementation of the right of access to justice. It its demonstrated that the restriction on access to justice for consideration of criminal procedure dispute in the court of cassation instance is the time constraint for filing cassation appeal for the convict; and for consideration of interlocutory court decisions – the procedure for assessing cassation appeal without holding a court hearing. The conclusion is substantiated on the need to waive the time constraint for filing cassation appeal for the convict against final court decisions that have entered into force, and for consideration of interim court decisions, the procedure for assessing cassation appeal against the interlocutory court decision should be eliminated without holding a court hearing.

Abstract: The article analyzes the controversial issues of defining the concepts of "right of access", "accessibility of justice to justice", "accessibility of court", "access to court", as well as the problems of restricting access to justice in criminal proceedings. The authors analyze in detail the existing approaches to the definition of these concepts. The subject of the study is the norms of Russian and foreign legislation regulating the right to access to justice in criminal proceedings. The object of the study is the legal relations arising from the realization of the right to access to justice. When writing the work, the following methods were used: universal system method of cognition, comparative legal, formal legal, statistical methods, as well as the method of logical analysis of normative legal acts. It is shown that the concept of "accessibility of justice" expresses an external objective factor unrelated to the criminal justice system, and "access to justice" in criminal proceedings should be considered as an internal objective factor, an intra-system factor associated with the very architecture of the construction of criminal proceedings, due to its public-legal nature. The authors analyze the study of complaints about the restriction of the right to access to justice received by the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation. The conclusion is substantiated that it is necessary to create a fundamentally new algorithm (legislative model) of the initial stage of criminal proceedings, providing access to justice without destroying the fundamental basis of criminal proceedings, while maintaining an optimal ratio between public and dispositive beginnings of criminal proceedings.

Abstract: This article analyzes the controversial issues of attributing the right of access to justice to the principles of criminal process. The author meticulously examines the origin of the right of access to justice in the Article 52 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The subject of this research is the norms of Russian and foreign legislation regulating the right of access to justice in criminal process. The object is the legal relations emerging in implementation of the right of access to justice. The article explores regulation of the right of access to justice in legislation of the Russian Federation and CIS member-states. It is demonstrated that the right of access to justice possesses certain characteristics that allow attributing it to the principles of criminal process: it represents an objective legal category that reflects the dominant in society political, legal and ethical ideas, and is most common legal provision in relation to other norms of law. A conclusion is substantiated that absence of the right of access to justice in criminal procedural legislation is a unique case of a gap in the principle of law.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the norms of the Russian and foreign legislation that regulate the validity of expert testimony in criminal procedure. The object of this research is the legal relations emerging in the course of verification and assessment of expert testimony from the perspective of its validity in criminal procedure. The author carefully examines the criteria of validity of expert testimony in the Russian Federation and the United States. Special attention is given to the criterion of general recognition of expert methodology. The author also reviews the question of the use of specialist opinion for contesting the expert testimony from the standpoint of validity. Based on the conducted analysis, the author states that unlike the U. S. legislation, the Russian legislation does not contain the requirements for validity of the expert testimony, which results in the absence of any competition between the criminal case experts. The author’s main contribution to the research of this topic consists in analyzing the criterion of the general recognition of methodology for settling the question of validity of the expert testimony in criminal procedure.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the norms of the Russian and foreign legislation that regulate the validity of expert testimony in criminal procedure. The object of this research is the legal relations emerging in the course of verification and assessment of expert testimony from the perspective of its validity in criminal procedure. The author carefully examines the criteria of validity of expert testimony in the Russian Federation and the United States. Special attention is given to the criterion of general recognition of expert methodology. The author also reviews the question of the use of specialist opinion for contesting the expert testimony from the standpoint of validity. Based on the conducted analysis, the author states that unlike the U. S. legislation, the Russian legislation does not contain the requirements for validity of the expert testimony, which results in the absence of any competition between the criminal case experts. The author’s main contribution to the research of this topic consists in analyzing the criterion of the general recognition of methodology for settling the question of validity of the expert testimony in criminal procedure.

Abstract: The subject of the research is the legal norms of the Russian and foreign legislation governing the procedure for obtaining an expert opinion as well as the procedure and methods for challenging it, judicial practice and developed theoretical propositions. The object of the research is the public relations arising in connection with the implementation of advocacy activities challenging the expert's opinion in the court of first instance. The author focuses on the continental and Anglo-Saxon system of investigation in criminal procedure. Special attention is paid to the discussion about the possibility of introducing "parallel investigation" into criminal procedure in the countries of the continental legal family. The methodological basis of the research is a set of general, particular and special research methods. In the course of the study the author has used the dialectical method, systemic and comparative legal methods. As a result of the research, the author comes to the following conclusions: the existing division of the procedure for obtaining an expert opinion based on differences between continental and Anglo-Saxon legal systems does not correspond to the realities of the modern world; and special contribution of the author is a comprehensive comparative legal study of the institution of an expert opinion in criminal procedure.