Abstract: The object of the study is the social relations that arise during the interaction of the prosecutor's office, law enforcement and other state bodies with religious organizations, and the impact of this interaction on the prevention of offenses. The author examines such aspects of the topic as the impact of the activities of religious organizations on the legal situation, the impact of cooperation with them of the prosecutor's office, law enforcement and other state bodies on the prevention of offenses, the specifics of the implementation of the directions of interaction of the prosecutor's office with religious organizations. The subject of the study is the materials of law enforcement practice, the norms of legislation on the prosecutor's office, the legislation of foreign countries regulating these public relations, the positions of scientists formed on the issue of interaction with religious organizations of state and, in particular, law enforcement agencies. Despite the separation of religion from the state proclaimed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, there is obviously an increasing influence on the legal situation of religious organizations, as well as the presence of significant potential for preventing crimes, especially in the field of terrorism and extremism, which is especially relevant in the modern situation. In this regard, there is no doubt that the Prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies need to cooperate with them in the field of crime prevention.
At the same time, the current legislation does not contain the necessary regulation of such cooperation; scientific study of the issue is also insufficient. Filling this gap, the author of the article, exploring the legal aspects of the implementation of the interaction of the prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies with religious organizations in the legal sphere, identifies the directions and forms of their interaction, which is the novelty of the study.
The conclusion is formulated about the need to consolidate the duty of interaction of the Prosecutor's office with public and religious organizations in the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, its directions and to consolidate in the order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation the forms of interaction of the Prosecutor's Office with religious organizations, which is a special contribution of the author to the study of this topic.

Abstract: The subject of the study is 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 essence of the principle of validity and its implementation in the activities of the prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies. The object of the research in the article is the social relations arising from the implementation of the principle of reasonableness of decision-making in the implementation of prosecutorial and other law enforcement activities. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as the correlation of validity and objective truth, the main characteristics of the principle and the problem of the correlation of the normative regulation of justification and the empirical task of its establishment. The principle of reasonableness of decision-making is one of the key principles of the activities of the prosecutor's office, other law enforcement agencies, as well as regulatory bodies; the need for reasonableness of decisions taken by law enforcement officials is stated in many regulations. At the same time, legal acts do not contain regulation of this fundamental principle; there is practically no scientific elaboration of it, there are only studies of its individual aspects, without highlighting the key provisions, the study of which in the activities of law enforcement agencies and in more detail the prosecutor's office is devoted to the article, what is the novelty of the study.
In the course of the research, the views of scientists on the content of the principle of validity, the procedure for its legal regulation were studied, as a result of which the main characteristics of this principle were identified, which should be the basis for the legal regulation of the principle in relation to the activities of the prosecutor's office and the court. The conclusion is formulated about the need to consolidate this principle in the Law on the Prosecutor's Office, which will prevent the adoption of unreasonable decisions possible if this principle is not observed, and abuse of authority, 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.

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. В  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.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the materials of the prosecutorial, law enforcement and judicial practice, norms of procedural legislation and legislation on the prosecutor's office, which regulate social relations emerged in exercising discretionary powers by the prosecutor in the context of oversight activity over execution of laws by the entities under supervision, as well as the positions formed on this matter. The object of this research is the social relations that arise in exercising discretionary powers by the prosecutor in the context of his oversight activity over execution of laws by the entities under supervision, essence, principles and limits, as well as the problems of their implementation occurring in prosecutorial activity. The study of discretionary authority of government branches lately receives increasing attention due ti the fact that limitless exercise of such authorities can invoke corruptive behavior. Examination of the questions of legal regulation of discretionary authority of the prosecutor is of prime importance as the prosecutor's office oversights the execution of laws and observance of rights of the citizens. The existing legal constructs that allow the exercise of discretion by the prosecutor are far from perfect, which causes the problems of law enforcement and violations of rights of the subjects under supervision. Therefore, the author explored the views of the scholars on the possibility of application and the scope of discretionary authority in the work of the prosecutor’s office and other government branches, effective legislation that regulates the discretionary authority of the prosecutor along with the practical aspects of its use. The novelty of this work and the author’s special contribution consist in the fact that based on the obtained results, the author offers a definition of the discretionary authority of the prosecutor, principles and limits of their application, as well as the way the legal constructs involving such authority should be structured.

Abstract: The object of this research is the questions of determination of legal status of the prosecutor participating in arbitration proceedings, and problematic aspects pertaining to exercise of his powers in reference to arbitration with a claim, as well as entering the proceedings in accordance with Part 5 of the Article 52 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The subject of this research is the materials of prosecutorial law enforcement practice and case law, as well as the norms of arbitration procedure and civil procedure legislation. The following methods were applied in the course of this work: formal-logical, comparative analysis, comparison, analysis and synthesis, systemic and structural analysis for the purpose of studying separate elements of the legal status of the prosecutor. The author conducted a comprehensive research of the legal status of the prosecutor who participates in arbitration proceedings. A conclusion is drawn that the prosecutor’s status can be defined as a government representative in his participation in the proceeding upon the initiative, or in entering the proceedings in accordance with Part 5 of the Article 52 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In order to determine the legal status of the prosecutor, the author analyzed the powers assigned by the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, as well as describes separated aspects that ate not regulated by the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Recommendations are given on the improvement of legislation that establishes the mechanism of exercising powers of the prosecutor in the arbitration proceedings.

Abstract: The object of this research is the questions of determination of legal status of the prosecutor participating in arbitration proceedings, and problematic aspects pertaining to exercise of his powers in reference to arbitration with a claim, as well as entering the proceedings in accordance with Part 5 of the Article 52 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The subject of this research is the materials of prosecutorial law enforcement practice and case law, as well as the norms of arbitration procedure and civil procedure legislation. The following methods were applied in the course of this work: formal-logical, comparative analysis, comparison, analysis and synthesis, systemic and structural analysis for the purpose of studying separate elements of the legal status of the prosecutor. The author conducted a comprehensive research of the legal status of the prosecutor who participates in arbitration proceedings. A conclusion is drawn that the prosecutor’s status can be defined as a government representative in his participation in the proceeding upon the initiative, or in entering the proceedings in accordance with Part 5 of the Article 52 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In order to determine the legal status of the prosecutor, the author analyzed the powers assigned by the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, as well as describes separated aspects that ate not regulated by the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. Recommendations are given on the improvement of legislation that establishes the mechanism of exercising powers of the prosecutor in the arbitration proceedings.