Exercising By the Defense the Right To Involve a Specialist into Criminal Proceedings

   Clause 3 of Article 123 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation stipulates that judicial proceedings are conducted on the basis of competition and equality of the parties. The problems of proof in an adversarial criminal trial are the subject of research in numerous scholarly papers. The current Criminal Procedure Law contains a number of norms regulating the defense party in the exercise of powers in criminal proceedings, in particular, in collecting evidence. However, the methods and procedure for collecting evidence by the defender are hardly regulated by the norms of this law, which the Authors of this paper emphasize. The lack of regulation results in the law enforcement officer being confronted with the problems arising when it is required to evaluate evidence presented by the defense. The basis for evaluating the expert's opinion is the ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, according to which, by virtue of the principle of legal equality, homogeneous relations should be regulated in a similar way. Therefore, verification and evaluation provided by an expert and presented by the defense attorney as evidence are carried out with regard to the need of complying with uniform rules and conditions for the similar evidence provided by the prosecution and by the court. The paper analyzes a number of problems related to exercising by the defense party the right to involve an expert into criminal proceedings, and focuses on the imperfection of the conceptual and terminological system and the lack of regulation of this activity of a defense attorney. To ensure the comprehensive study of the issue indicated in the title of the paper and the deep understanding of the content, the Authors consistently examine the following issues: the legal grounds for the use by the defense of the results of the applying expert knowledge by well-informed parties; evaluation of the specialist's conclusion in the evidence system and the ratio of evidence “specialist's conclusion” and “expert's conclusion”; the conditions of acquiring by the defense the evidence “specialist's conclusion”. Since criminal procedure law does not actually “prescribe” the procedure for acquiring by the defense such evidence as a “specialist's conclusion”, the Authors, using the rulings of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, provide an approximate sequence of actions of the defense attorney intending to involve a specialist and their conclusion.

1. Akhmedova M. B. The Essence of a Specialist’s Decision and the Procedural Order of Its Obtainment. Saratov State Academy of Law Herald. 2010;1:169-174. (In Russ.)

2. Popova E. D. Evidential Value of the Activity of a Specialist in Criminal Proceedings. Naukosfera. 2023; 4-1:474-478. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.7844985 (In Russ.)

3. Maksurov A. A. Problems of the Specialist’s Status in Criminal Procedure. Bulletin of the Institute of Law of the Bashkir State University. 2023;3:89-98. doi: 10.33184/vest-law-bsu-2023.19.9 (In Russ.)

4. Ivanov S. N. The Role of a Specialist in Criminal Proceedings. Law. Legislation. Person. 2018;2:68-73. (In Russ.)

5. Semenov E. A., Lukyanchikova S. A. Conclusion of a Specialist in Criminal Proceedings: a New Law Enforcement Perspective. State Service and Personnel. 2022;1:213-215. doi: 10.24411/2312-0444-2022-1-213-215 (In Russ.)

6. Bryanskaya E. V., Rukavishnikov P. P. Acceptability of the Conclusions and Evidence of a Specialist in a Criminal Case Proceedings. Academical Law Journal. 2019;2:35-41. (In Russ.)

7. Khannanov I. N. Expert and Specialist in the Criminal Process of Russia as a Person Who Has a Special Knowledge. Academy of Pedagogical Ideas of INNOVATION. Series: Student Scientific Bulletin. 2020;6:73-76. (In Russ.)

8. Lyasina E. A., Vologina E. V. Differentiation of the Functions of an Expert and a Specialist in Criminal Proceedings. Poisk (Volgograd). 2022;2:46-49. (In Russ.)

9. Ognerubov N. A. Expert Knowledge in Criminal Proceedings. Moscow: Yurait Publ.; 2022. 92 p. (In Russ.)

10. Chelysheva O. V. The Use of Expert Knowledge in the Investigation of Crimes. St. Petersburg: Saint Petersburg University of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia Publ.; 2015. 92 p. (In Russ.)

11. Bryanskaya E. V., Shishkina N. E. Security Features in the Process of Proof in Criminal Cases. Siberian Law Herald. 2015;4:107-114. (In Russ.)

12. Manova N. S., Churikova A. Yu. How To Make a Lawyer’s Investigation an Effective Means of Proof. Criminal Procedure. 2020;9:62-69. (In Russ.)

13. Bayanov A. I., Garmaev Yu. P., Nazarov A. D. The Line of Defense Is a Means of Enforcement of the Position of the Defense in Pre-Trial Proceedings in a Criminal Case. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2022;15(8):1194-1203. doi: 10.17516/1997-1370-0922 (In Russ.)

14. Elagina E. V., Kharatishvili A. G. Expert’s Report as Evidence of an Indefinite Form and Unclear Content. Expert-Criminalist. 2021;4:10-12. doi: 10.18572/2072-442X-2021-4-10-12 (In Russ.)

15. Ragulin A. V. The Right of the Lawyer-Defender to Attraction of the Specialist: Problems of Realization and Way of Their Decision. Vestnik of Volzhsky University named after V. N. Tatishchev. 2012;2:57-66. (In Russ.)

16. Kupriyanov A. A. How the Lawyer Can Assemble and To Achieve the Admission of Defence Evidence. Criminal Procedure. 2020;9:28-31. (In Russ.)

17. Soloviev S. A. Lawyer’s Investigation: Problems and Real Opportunities. Criminal Procedure. 2020;9:56-61. (In Russ.)