The article analyzes a problematic question raised by the lawyers: investigators in the modern competitive (winner-loser) criminal procedure of the Russian Federation often fail to meet the requests of the defenders of the preliminary investigation by the investigative actions (questioning of witnesses, etc.), although in part 2 of article 159 of the code it is clearly stated that petition applications cannot be refused if the circumstances the establishment of which they indicate are of importance for the criminal case. But the thing is that the opposite competing sides - prosecution and protection - have quite different interpretations of the provisions of the law „to be relevant to the criminal case,“ namely in their adversarial-winning goals, as each side seeks to win the process (case) in their favor. Therefore investigators at their sole discretion, upon the favorable for them outcome of the parties often refuse counsel in satisfaction of their claims. According to the authors, solution of this problem lies in introducing institute of establishing the objective truth in a criminal case into the code of criminal procedure. The bill of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, devoted to the establishing of objective truth in criminal process is aimed at it. The authors propose to clearly distinguish between an objectively true type of the criminal process and a competitive (winner-loser) type or criminal procedure, in their view, individual rights are better protected m an objectively-true criminal proceedings.
ttorneys, personal discretion of the investigator, objectively truth, objectively true type of the criminal process, human rights at pre-trial, adversarial-winning interest of the parties, a competitive(winner-loser) type of criminal trial, justice, defense, prosecution, petition
1. O pravah cheloveka na dosudebnoy stadii // Volgogradskiy advokat. 2015. № 4 // Elektronnaya versiya gazety i arhiv publikaciy. URL: www.apvo-volgograd.ru (data obrascheniya: 29.07.2015).
2. Barak A. Sudeyskoe usmotrenie: per. s angl. M., 1999.
3. Marficin P. G. Usmotrenie sledovatelya (ugolovno-processual'nyy aspekt): avtoref. dis. … d-ra yurid. nauk. M., 2003.
4. Pronin K. V. Diskrecionnye polnomochiya suda v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. Chelyabinsk, 2010.
5. Kommentariy k Ugolovno-processual'nomu kodeksu RSFSR / otv. red. V. I. Radchenko; nauch. red. V. T. Tomin. 4-e izd., pererab. i dop. M., 2000.
