Abstract
The improvement of regulatory framework for attracting a specialist to participate in criminal proceedings on the initiative of the defense and other participants in the process who do not have authority is reasonably considered in theory and in practice as an extension of the adversarial principles in the procedures for the use of special knowledge. At the same time, the noticeable bias observed in modern law practice towards the use of expert opinions and testimony in the interests of principals to the detriment of lawyer activity in official procedures for the appointment and production of forensic examinations cannot be considered justified. Seeking the help of a specialist is not an equivalent substitute for participation in forensic expert activities in criminal cases, but rather a forced measure when attempts by a lawyer to participate in the appointment and production of examinations were impossible, or were undertaken, but failed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
