Differentiation of the criminal procedure form: limits of admissibility

Abstract

The aim of the work is to establish the limits of admissibility in the differentiation of the criminal procedure form. Since the period of mass repressions of the 20s — 30s of the last century, in the domestic criminal process there has been a tendency to integrate administrative proceedings in criminal proceedings. Until now, there has been a practical position on the need to introduce administrative procedures into the criminal process in order to simplify and expedite criminal reprisals. In the science of the criminal process, throughout the century there has been a discussion about the directions and possibilities of differentiating the procedural form. Such discussions are devoid of the methodological basis, since the alleged simplification in the criminal process is not aimed at procedural economy, but at replacing the criminal procedure form with administrative proceedings. The achieved results are based on the analysis of historical documents and scientific achievements of criminal procedure law. It is noted that the used methodology of differentiation of the criminal procedure form is traditional for a repressive criminal process, and therefore the use of the experience of developed countries is not always perceived from the position of restorative justice. Based on the research, an author's understanding of the differentiation of the criminal procedure form is formed and its limits are determined. Achieving the effectiveness of the criminal process and rationalization is possible with the help of the potential of modern sciences. The author comes to the conclusion that the reduction of criminal procedural evidence to the protocol-mandative proceedings does not fit into the framework of the modern criminal process. The integration of administrative procedures in criminal proceedings is inadmissible and discredits the criminal process as a special kind of justice and state activity.