The Ratio of the Purpose and Purpose of Criminal Proceedings in the Russian Federation

The relevance of the study is due to the inconsistency of the purpose of criminal proceedings formulated in Article 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with its goals set out in Article 297 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which can only be achieved through an adversarial form of criminal proceedings. This discrepancy creates problems of law enforcement, which in turn reduce the effectiveness of criminal proceedings in general.
The purpose is to study the criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation regarding the possibility of a verdict in the case corresponding to Article 297 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.
The objectives of the study are: the study of criminal procedural norms in their interaction for the possibility of achieving the result indicated in Article 297 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in criminal proceedings, as well as the analysis of various positions on this issue.
Methodology. The methodological basis of the research is the method of dialectical scientific cognition; a systematic approach to the problem under consideration, a historical method, a formal logical method, etc.
Results. In the course of the research, the defects of the criminal procedure legislation were revealed in terms of its internal contradictions between the purpose, form and goals, which do not always allow a lawful, reasonable and fair sentence to be passed in the case.
Conclusion. The current criminal procedure legislation proceeds from different approaches to the concept of justice (as a means and an end). Meanwhile, justice as a means (the equivalence of the rights of the parties participating in criminal proceedings) in the adversarial process does not ensure the achievement of a fair decision in the case, and the purpose of criminal proceedings as its function does not allow achieving the goal of criminal proceedings, which generates problems of law enforcement, which in turn reduce the effectiveness of criminal proceedings as a whole.

1. Sviridov M. K. Tendencii razvitiya rossijskogo ugolovno-processual'nogo zakonodatel'stva [Trends in the development of Russian criminal procedure legislation]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of Tomsk State University, 2012, no. 358, pp. 52−56.

2. Iering R. fon. Cel' v prave [The goal in law]. Izbrannye trudy [Selected works]. St. Petersburg, Yurid. centr Press Publ., 2006, vol. 1. 618 p.

3. Ekimov A. I. Pravo v processe spravedlivosti: k metodologii issledovaniya [ Law in the Process of Justice: towards a research methodology]. Pravovedenie = Jurisprudence, 2013, no. 2 (307), pp. 51−61.

4. Stel'mah V. A. Sistema sredstv dokazyvaniya v dosudebnyh stadiyah ugolovnogo processa: problemy teorii, normativnogo regulirovaniya i praktiki. Diss. dokt. yurid. nauk [The system of means of proof in the pre-trial stages of the criminal process: problems of theory, regulatory regulation and practice. Dr. legal sci. diss.]. Ekaterinburg, 2021. 522 p.

5. Agutin A. V. Mirovozzrencheskie idei v ugolovno-processual'nom dokazyvanii. Avtoref. diss. dokt. yurid. nauk [Ideological ideas in criminal procedural proof. Dr. legal sci. abstract diss.]. N. Novgorod, 2005. 448 p.

6. Savickij V. M. O prezumpcii nevinovnosti i drugih principah ugolovnogo processa [On the presumption of innocence and other principles of the criminal process]. Ugolovnyj process Rossii [Criminal Process of Russia]; ed. by V. M. Savickii. Moscow, Bek Publ., 1997. 314 p.

7. Reznik G. M. Prichina plohogo kachestva sledstviya v snizhenii prestizha professij sledovatelya i prokurora [The reason for the poor quality of the investigation is the decline in the prestige of the profession of investigator and prosecutor]. Ugolovnyj process = Criminal process, 2022, no. 2, pp. 50−59.

8. Mihajlovskaya I. B. Prava lichnosti − novyj prioritet Ugolovno-processual'nogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii [Individual rights are a new priority of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation]. Rossijskaya yusticiya = Russian Justice, 2002, no. 7, pp. 2−4.

9. Andrejchenko L. S. Realizaciya spravedlivogo pravosudiya cherez prizmu ego social'noj cennosti [Realization of fair justice through the prism of its social value]. Sudebnaya vlast' i ugolovnyj process = Judicial power and criminal procedure, 2019, no. 4, pp. 22−27.

10. Astaf'ev A. Yu. Effektivnost' sudebnoj deyatel'nosti [Efficiency of judicial activity]. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pravo = Bulletin of the Voronezh State University. Series: Law, 2012, no. 1, pp. 123−133.

11. Titova A. V. Ponyatie pravosudnosti i spravedlivosti prigovora po rossijskomu ugolovnomu pravu [The concept of justice and the fairness of the sentence in Russian criminal law]. Filosofiya prava = Philosophy of Law, 2009, no. 5, pp. 117−119.

12. Glebov A. N. Cennostnyj dissonans v pravovom regulirovanii [Value dissonance in legal regulation]. Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Social'no-ekonomicheskie i pravovye issledovaniya = Bulletin of the Tyumen State University. Socio-economic and legal studies, 2016, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 101−112.

13. Fel'dshtejn G. S. Lekcii po ugolovnomu sudoproizvodstvu [Lectures on criminal proceedings]. Moscow, Tipo-lit Publ., V. Rihter, 1915. 433 p.

14. Ismailov N. O. Spravedlivost' kak mera svobody [Justice as a measure of freedom]. Sociologiya vlasti = Sociology of Power, 2009, no. 7, pp. 136−144.

15. Kanarsh G. Yu. Social'naya spravedlivost': filosofskaya koncepciya i rossijskaya situaciya [Social justice: a philosophical concept and the Russian situation]. Moscow, Moscow Univ. for the Humanities Publ., 2011. 236 p.

16. Ryabinina T. K. Osobennosti realizacii sudebnoj vlasti v stadii naznacheniya sudebnogo zasedaniya: proshloe i nastoyashchee [Features of the implementation of judicial power at the stage of appointment of a court session: past and present]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2016. 240 p.

17. Nasonova I. A. O sisteme sredstv ugolovno-processual'noj zashchity [About the system of means of criminal procedural protection]. Vestnik Voronezhskogo instituta MVD Rossii = Bulletin of the Voronezh Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 2010, no. 3, pp. 43−48.

18. Doroshkov V. V. Mirovozzrencheskie podhody k sostyazatel'nosti v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Ideological approaches to competition in criminal proceedings]. Mirovoj sud'ya = Justice of the Peace, 2019, no. 7, pp. 3−11.

19. Vlasova G. B., Polikarpova N. A. Ponyatie pravosudiya kak filosofskoj i yuridicheskoj kategorii [The concept of justice as a philosophical and legal category]. Molodoj uchyonyj = Young Scientist, 2015, no. 10, pp. 897−900.

20. Mihajlovskaya I. B. Celi, funkcii i principy rossijskogo ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva (ugolovno-processual'naya forma) [Goals, functions and principles of the Russian criminal procedure (criminal procedure form)]. Moscow Prospekt Publ., 2003. 142 p.

21. Balakshin V. S. Dopustimost' dokazatel'stv: ponyatie, pravovaya priroda, znachenie i algoritm ocenki [Admissibility of evidence: concept, legal nature, meaning and evaluation algorithm]. Ekaterinburg, UMC UPI Publ., 2013. 316 p.

22. Rossinskij S. B. Neskol'ko slov o celi dokazyvaniya v sostyazatel'nom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [A few words about the purpose of proof in adversarial criminal proceedings]. Rossijskaya yusticiya = Russian Justice, 2015, no. 10, pp. 31−34.