Public Prosecution in the System of Criminal Procedural Functions

Abstract

The paper discusses the concept and types of criminal procedural functions, analyzes the points of view of legal scholars who at various times formulated the corresponding definition. According to the author, the semantic content set by the legislator is set forth in Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation is an important contribution to the improvement of the conceptual apparatus of criminal procedural law; it is intended to ensure uniformity of interpretation of the concepts they designate and, consequently, uniformity of action of the relevant criminal procedure institutions. At the same time, the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation has no definition of the concept of criminal procedure function. Based on the analysis of the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation and the opinions of jurists who expressed opinions on the concept of the criminal procedure function, it is proposed to include an additional clause in Art. 5 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation that would contain this concept in the proposed edition of the author. It is also proposed to divide the criminal procedural functions into two groups in connection with their performance by the participants of the criminal process both at the pre-trial and at the trial stages. The opinion is expressed on the independent nature of the function of assisting criminal proceedings carried out by its other participants, referred to in Ch. 8 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation. The content of the function of supporting public prosecution as a form and stage of criminal prosecution and its place in the system of other criminal procedure functions are analyzed. The author proposes a definition of the concept of public prosecution, which is considered as a necessary element and at the same time as a special form of the function of the prosecution in criminal proceedings. This activity differs significantly in terms of tasks, subject and conditions of execution from the accusatory activities of the investigating officer, investigator, body of inquiry in pre-trial proceedings.