Comparative legal analysis of the expertise in court under the criminal law of Ukraine and CIS countries

Abstract

A comparative analysis of the expertise during the criminal proceedings in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and the Republics of Azerbaijan, Belarus, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and the Russian Federation has been carried out.

Proposals were submitted to the domestic Criminal Procedure Code to increase the efficiency of the expertise in court. It is proved that in a situation of passivity of the parties to the criminal proceedings and the victim to make an informed decision in case it is necessary to establish certain circumstances of the offense, the court has the right to appoint an examination on its own initiative without any restrictions. The expertise appointed in court in respect of the expertise carried out in the pre-trial investigation may be additional, repeated or new. The expert is summoned to court for expertise, when: new circumstances have been established in the court proceedings that require research; several examinations were conducted at the pre-trial stage and experts came to the opposite conclusion; previously conducted expert research is incomplete.

Expertise in court may be conducted by an expert (experts) who gave an opinion during the pre-trial investigation, or another expert (experts) appointed by the court, or both experts together. The expert who conducted the expertise during the pre-trial investigation, or the specialist to whom the expertise will be assigned, summoned to court, have the right to participate in the expertise of objects and documents, conduct court proceedings related to the subject of expertise, discuss issues and objects for expertise, to specify the term of expertise. After the examination, the expert must announce the opinion in court and may be questioned to supplement and clarify the opinion. The presiding judge at the request of the parties should provide an opportunity to study in detail the conclusion of the expertise conducted in court.