DISTRIBUTION OF POWER OF PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION BODIES, PROCURATOR AND EVIDENCE EXAMINATION COURT

The article deals with the problems of evidence examination as a complex multistage process, in which the results of previous examination activities are subject to controls at the next stages of criminal proceedings, the article examines the issue of distribution of power for evidence examination of authorized participants in criminal proceedings. Based on a study of the methods for evidence examination at different stages of criminal proceedings, the limitations of evidence examination at the preliminary investigation stage are shown. The burden of evidence examination, including its admissibility, is court’s responsibility and is carried out in almost all judicial instances, including the stage of sentence reviewing because of new and newly discovered circumstances. According to the plan of the legislator, the preliminary hearing was supposed to serve as a tool for evidence examination. One of the functions of preliminary hearing is the exclusion of inadmissible evidence. However, this important function of the preliminary hearing was made senseless by the possibility of revising the assessment of the excluded, as inadmissible, evidence in the next stage of the criminal process. As a result, the court, instead of considering the merits of the case and examining exclusively the content of evidence in order to assess the validity of the charges, investigates their admissibility, and its inner conviction is shaped by all the evidence, including those obtained in law violation. To solve this problem, modern researchers propose the introduction of the institute of investigative judges, who, prior to the beginning of the trial, will have to check the evidence from the point of view of their admissibility, which will exclude the examination of inadmissible evidence during the consideration of the criminal case, as well as strengthen the adversarial principles in the pre-trial part of the criminal process.