Evidence and Proof in Criminal Proceedings: Problems of Understanding their Nature

The paper is devoted to the consideration of topical issues related to the essential characteristics of such categories of evidentiary law as «evidence» and «proof», due to the ambiguity of approaches that researchers apply to disclose their nature.

The study purports to identify the conformity of the actual proof procedure with its definition reflected in the law, and to formulate scientific recommendations for improving the law in this part. Scientists’ ideas that the legislative definition of evidence does not reflect the requirement of their reliability are critically assessed, and the absence of grounds for such a conclusion is demonstrated.

In the course of the research, scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, formal-logical and legal interpretation were used. Based on the terminological analysis, in contrast to the opinion of scientists who believe that such an element of proof as gathering should be replaced by the concept of «formation», the author substantiates the position that all elements of proof, and not just gathering, represent the process of evidence formation. Therefore, the most accurate characteristic of criminal procedural proof is the process of transformation of the information obtained during the proceedings into evidence to substantiate the presence or absence of circumstances to be proved, i.e., the process of forming evidence.

In this regard, the author concludes that for a more accurate reflection of this process in a number of norms of Chapter 11 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, it would be necessary to replace the concept of «evidence» with the concept of «information that can be used as evidence». According to the author, the legislative definition of criminal procedural proof should reflect not only the actual process of evidentiary activity, covering the initial stage of criminal proceedings, but also its target orientation. For this purpose, the author proposes the following wording of Article 85 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation: «Proof consists in gathering, verifying and evaluating information in order to obtain evidence substantiating the presence or absence of circumstances provided for in Article 73 of this Code for the correct resolution of a criminal case.»

1. Azarov VA, Tarichko IYu. Funktsiya sudebnogo kontrolya v istorii, teorii i praktike ugolovnogo protsessa Rossii [The function of judicial control in the history, theory and practice of the criminal procedure in Russia]. Omsk: Omsk State University Publ.; 2004. (In Russ.).

2. Aleksandrov AA. Analiz sentyabrskikh predlozheniy Minekonomrazvitiya po izmeneniyu ugolovnoprotsessualnogo prava [Analysis of the September proposals of the Ministry of Economic Development to change the criminal procedure law]. Sovremennoe sostoyanie i problemy ugolovnogo i ugolovnoprotsessualnogo prava, yuridicheskoy psikhologii: materialy Mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konferentsii, 13– 14 dekabrya 2012 g. [The current state and problems of criminal and criminal procedure law, legal psychology. Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference, December 13–14, 2012]. Volgograd: VolGU Publ.; 2012. Pp. 6–18. (In Russ.).

3. Amasyants AE. Logicheskoe i ugolovno-protsessualnoe dokazyvanie [Logical and criminal procedural proof]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya «Filosofskie nauki» [Bulletin of the Moscow State Region University. Series «Philosophy»]. 2012;3:6-11. (In Russ.).

4. Baev OYa. Atributivnye priznaki i kachestvo ugolovno-protsessualnogo dokazatelstva [Attributive features and quality of criminal procedural evidence]. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya «Pravo» [Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series «Law»]. 2014;4(19):190-206. (In Russ.).

5. Balakshin VS.Dokazatelstva v teorii i praktike ugolovno-protsessualnogo dokazyvaniya [Evidence in the theory and practice of criminal procedural proof]. Ekaterinburg: UMTs UPI Publ.; 2004. (In Russ.).

6. Belkin AR. Teoriya dokazyvaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: ucheb. posobie dlya vuzov: v 2 ch. Ch. 2 [Theory of proof in criminal proceedings. A textbook for universities. In 2 parts. Part 2]. 2nd ed., rev. and suppl. Moscow: Yurayt Publ.; 2018. (In Russ.).

7. Bryanskaya EV. Vzaimosvyaz dokazatelstv v protsesse dokazyvaniya po ugolovnomu delu [The relationship of evidence in the process of proving a criminal case]. Sibirskie ugolovno-protsessualnye i kriminalisticheskie chteniya [Siberian criminal process and criminalistic readings]. 2017;3(17):44-51. (In Russ.).

8. Bufetova MSh, Lukoshkina IV. Aktualnye problemy dokazatelstvennoy deyatelnosti zashchitnika v rossiyskom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Topical issues of the evidentiary activity of the defender in the Russian criminal proceedings]. Sibirskie ugolovno-protsessualnye i kriminalisticheskie chteniya [Siberian criminal process and criminalistic readings]. 2018;4(22):41-53. (In Russ.).

9. Dalgatova AM. Ob obshchikh voprosakh dokazyvaniya po ugolovnym delam [On general issues of proof in criminal cases]. Pravo i gosudarstvo: teoriya i praktika [Law and State: The Theory and Practice]. 2017;11(155):119-125. (In Russ.).

10. Zavidov BD, Kuznetsov NP. Problemy dokazatelstv i dokazyvaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Problems of evidence and evidence in criminal proceedings]. Legal reference system «KonsultantPlus» [Electronic resource]. «KonsultantPlus»; 2004. (In Russ.).

11. Zaytseva EA, Sadovskiy AI. V razvitie ucheniya S.A. Sheyfera o formirovanii dokazatelstv [In the development of S.A. Sheyfer’s teaching on the formation of evidence]. Vestnik Samarskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Vestnik of Samara State University]. 2014;11-2(122):22-28. (In Russ.).

12. Kalinovskiy KB. Ugolovnyy protsess. Konspekt lektsiy [Criminal procedure. Lecture notes]. Ugolovnyy protsess. Sayt K. Kalinovskogo [Criminal procedure]. The K. Kalinovskiy website. Available from: http://kalinovsky-k.narod.ru/p/lecture_notes/ [cited 2022 December 28]. (In Russ.).

13. Komarov IM. Sobiranie, proverka i otsenka pokazaniy i ikh ispolzovanie v dokazyvanii po ugolovnomu delu [Gathering, verification and evaluation of testimony and their use in proving a criminal case]. Izvestiya TulGU. Ekonomicheskie i yuridicheskie nauki. 2017;4-2:31-38. (In Russ.).

14. Korenevskiy YuV. Dokazyvanie v ugolovnom protsesse (zakon, teoriya, praktika) [Proof in criminal proceedings (law, theory, practice)]. In: Lvov VA, editor. Dokazyvanie v ugolovnom protsesse: Traditsii i sovremennost [Proof in criminal proceedings: Traditions and modernity]. Moscow: Yurist Publ.; 2000. Pp. 7–167. (In Russ.).

15. Kostenko R. Dokazatelstva v ugolovnom protsesse [Evidence in criminal proceedings]. Ugolovnoe pravo [Criminal Law]. 2003;3:89-91. (In Russ.).

16. Grishina EA. Kratkiy slovar inostrannykh slov [A consise dictionary of foreign words]. Moscow: Astrel; AST Publ.; 2002. (In Russ.).

17. Lantukh NV. Kriterii proverki i otsenki dopustimosti i dostovernosti dokazatelstv pri osushchestvlenii ugolovnogo presledovaniya [Criteria for checking and evaluating the admissibility and reliability of evidence in criminal prosecution]. Zhurnal pravovykh i ekonomicheskikh issledovaniy [Journal of Legal and Economic Research]. 2021;2:85-96. (In Russ.).

18. Lyublinskiy PI. Predmet i znachenie ucheniya o dokazatelstvakh (vstup. st.) [The subject and meaning of the doctrine of evidence (Introductory article)]. In: Stifen J. Ocherk dokazatelstvennogo prava [An essay on evidentiary law]. St. Petersburg: Senate Printing House; 1910. Pp. 1–18. (In Russ.).

19. Popov AP. Legalnaya definitsiya «dokazyvanie» v ugolovno-protsessualnom prave [Legal definition of «proof» in criminal procedure law]. Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatelstve [Gaps in Russian legislation]. 2018;1:76-79. (In Russ.).

20. Popov AP, Zinchenko IA. Definitsiya «dokazyvanie» v ugolovno-protsessualnom prave Rossiyskoy Federatsii i gosudarstv blizhnego zarubezhya [The definition of «proof» in the criminal procedural law of the Russian Federation and neighboring countries]. Biblioteka kriminalista. Nauchnyy zhurnal [Criminalist’s Library Scientific Journal]. 2018;2:328-335. (In Russ.).

21. Rossinskiy SB. Ponyatie i sushchnost sledstvennykh deystviy v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: diskussiya prodolzhaetsya [The concept and essence of investigative actions in criminal proceedings: The discussion continues]. Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika [Russian Laws: Experience, Analysis, Practice]. 2015;2:16-31. (In Russ.).

22. Rossinskiy SB. Sobiranie dokazatelstv kak «pervyy» etap dokazyvaniya po ugolovnomu delu [Collecting evidence as the «first» stage of proof in a criminal case]. Yuridicheskiy vestnik Samarskogo universiteta [Juridical Journal of Samara University]. 2020;6(3):901-103. (In Russ.).

23. Sementsov VA. O sootnoshenii sledstvennykh i inykh protsessualnykh deystviy, prednaznachennykh dlya sobiraniya dokazatelstv [On the ratio of investigative and other procedural actions intended for the collection of evidence]. Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika [Russian Laws: Experience, Analysis, Practice]. 2015;2:39-45. (In Russ.).

24. Smolkova IV, Dunaeva MS. Osnovaniya vmeshatelstva pravookhranitelnykh organov i suda v chastnuyu zhizn grazhdan: ugolovno-protsessualnyy aspekt [Grounds for interference of law enforcement agencies and the court in the private life of citizens: Criminal procedural aspect]. Kriminologicheskiy zhurnal Baykalskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta ekonomiki i prava [Criminology Journal of Baikal National University of Economics and Law]. 2014;3:184-192. (In Russ.).

25. Lupinskaya PA, editor. Ugolovno-protsessualnoe pravo Rossiyskoy Federatsii: uchebnik [Criminal procedural law of the Russian Federation. A textbook]. Moscow: Yurist Publ.; 2006. (In Russ.).

26. Sheyfer SA. Dokazatelstva i dokazyvanie po ugolovnym delam: problemy teorii i pravovogo regulirovaniya [Evidence and proof in criminal cases: Problems of theory and legal regulation]. Moscow: Norma Publ.; 2009. (In Russ.).

27. Sheyfer SA. Dosudebnoe proizvodstvo v Rossii: Etapy razvitiya sledstvennoy, sudebnoy i prokurorskoy vlasti [Pre-trial proceedings in Russia. Stages of development of investigative, judicial and prosecutorial power]. Moscow: Norma Publ.: Infra-M Publ.; 2013. (In Russ.).

28. Sheyfer SA. Sobiranie dokazatelstv v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse: Metodologicheskie i pravovye problemy [Collecting evidence in the Soviet criminal procedure. Methodological and legal problems]. Saratov: Publishing house of the Saratov University; 1986. (In Russ.).

29. Sheyfer SA, Nikolaeva KA. K voprosu o strukture dokazyvaniya [On the issue of the structure of evidence]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo [Tomsk State University Journal. Law]. 2016;2(20):82-87. (In Russ.).