Статья 'Прокурорская наука: современное состояние и тенденции развития' - журнал 'NB: Административное право и практика администрирования' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Editorial board > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Article Processing Charge > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
NB: Administrative Law and Administration Practice
Reference:

Prosecutor's science: current state and development trends

Usov Aleksei Yur'evich

PhD in Law

Associate Professor of the Department for Prosecutor Supervision and Participation in Civil and Arbitrage Trials at Irkutsk Law Institute, Branch of the University of Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation

664035, Russia, Irkutskaya oblast', g. Irkutsk, ul. Shevtsova, 1

alexus_555@mail.ru
Other publications by this author
 

 

DOI:

10.7256/2306-9945.2023.4.44189

EDN:

YZWXCJ

Received:

30-09-2023


Published:

07-10-2023


Abstract: The article is devoted to the study of the history, current state and trends in the development of prosecutorial science in the Russian Federation. Currently, legal science is undergoing a reform associated with the process of consolidation of scientific specialties. The article defends the need to preserve prosecutorial science as an independent branch of legal knowledge, characterized by a whole galaxy of outstanding scientists engaged in the study of the theory of prosecutorial activity, an independent system of scientific and educational organizations that form scientific schools in this area, and, finally, a detailed elaboration of the scientific foundations of the functions and areas (areas) of the prosecutor's office, a doctrinal approach to the development and functioning of the prosecutor's system. The main conclusions of the conducted scientific research are the ideas that at present there is a steady trend towards the separation of prosecutorial science into an independent branch of scientific knowledge. The article also contains proposals for a more detailed definition of the scientific branch 5.1.2 – "Public law (state law) sciences" of the content of scientific research devoted to prosecutorial science, which, in addition, would make it possible to more accurately distinguish scientific research also devoted to the study of prosecutorial supervision, which, however, are conducted within the framework of scientific branch 5.1.4 "Criminal law sciences".


Keywords:

prosecutor, prosecutor's office, prosecutor supervision, prosecutorial activity, prosecutorial science, public law sciences, state legal sciences, scientific specialty, legal science, dissertation research

This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

 

As you know, on 24.02.2021, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation approved a new nomenclature of scientific specialties (Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia No. 118 dated 24.02.2021), according to which the degrees of Candidate of sciences and Doctor of Sciences are awarded, which led, in fact, to the so-called "consolidation of scientific specialties". In this regard, many scientific specialties, including those included in the social, humanitarian, and legal sciences, were merged. This process also fully affected the previously existing scientific specialty 12.00.11 – "Judicial activity, prosecutorial activity, human rights and law enforcement activity", which was largely included in the scientific specialty 5.1.2 – "Public law (state law) sciences".

At the same time, the existing scientific research in this area indicates that the concept of "Prosecutorial supervision" as a science has gradually transformed into a broader one – "Prosecutorial activity" [5, p. 12-15] and, finally, "Prosecutorial science" [6, p. 125-130]. Science as a social institution is characterized by the activity of scientists engaged in the development of a certain scientific branch of knowledge, the presence of scientific organizations and institutions, scientific schools and communities, the division and cooperation of scientific knowledge and scientific work, etc.

The formation of prosecutorial science, as well as the formation of the system of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation, has a rather long and complicated history. One of the founders of the theory of prosecutorial supervision is Sofia Gerasimovna Berezovskaya, a scientist who consistently and successfully sought recognition of the independent branch status of prosecutorial science. In the 50s of the XX century, scientific and educational literature practically paid no attention to the theory of prosecutorial activity. S. G. Berezovskaya became one of the first developers of the concept of prosecutorial supervision as an independent branch of legal knowledge. Initially, this approach was not widely supported in science. When preparing the monograph "Soviet Socialist Democracy" [1], coverage of the institute of prosecutorial supervision was not even planned, but S. G. Berezovskaya made sure that a separate chapter about it was included in the book [2, p. 226]. The founders of prosecutorial science also include Tadevosyan Vramshapu Samsonovich, Karpets Igor Ivanovich, Berenson Alexander Davidovich, Zvirbul Vladimir Karlovich, who not only steadfastly and consistently defended the independence of prosecutorial science, worked on the development of a system of this branch of scientific knowledge, the development of scientific foundations for the implementation of various functions and other areas of prosecutorial activity, but also contributed to the preparation of the whole pleiades of outstanding scientists, many of whom continue to develop prosecutorial science to this day (including Vinokurov A.Yu., Vinokurov Yu.E., Bessarabov V.G., Kazarina A.H., Kobzarev F.M., Ryabtsev V.P., Smirnov A.F., Shcherba S.P., Yastrebov V.B. and many others).

Prosecutorial science is characterized by a gradually developing system of scientific and educational organizations, on the basis of which the writing and defense of dissertations for the degree of candidate and doctor of law are carried out, scientific schools are formed, specialists are trained on the basis of agreements on targeted training for bodies and organizations of the prosecutor's office. There is no doubt that the main scientific potential, which has absorbed all the best traditions of prosecutorial science, is embodied in the University of the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation (formerly the Academy of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation), which since 2007 has united the Research Institute for the Strengthening of Law and Order at the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation (established in 1963 was the legal successor Institute of Criminalistics at the Prosecutor's Office of the USSR, established by Order of the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated February 11, 1949 No. 1680-r), St. Petersburg (1966), Moscow (1970) and Irkutsk Institutes of Advanced Training (2007). Currently, the structure of the University of the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation also includes the Crimean, Kazan and Far Eastern Law Institute (branch).

In addition, strong scientific schools that contribute to the development of prosecutorial science have been established and are successfully functioning on the basis of the Kutafin Moscow State Law University, the Saratov State Law Academy, and the Ural State Law University. Unfortunately, it should be noted that other scientific and educational organizations, on the basis of which dissertation councils operate in the scientific specialty 5.1.2 and train students studying in the target areas of the prosecutor's office, currently most often do not pay enough attention to prosecutor's science, focusing on related areas of scientific research.

Prosecutorial science is currently distinguished not only by the detailed elaboration of the scientific foundations of the functions of the prosecutor's office, but also by a conceptual approach to the development of the prosecutorial system. So, in 1994, on the basis of the Research Institute, the work "The Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation" (the Concept of development for the transitional period) was published [3], in 1998 - "Problems of the development of the legal status of the Russian Prosecutor's Office (in a transitional period)" [4]. Moreover, on the pages of scientific publications there is an active discussion on a regular basis regarding the formation of the concept of the development of prosecutorial science and the prosecutor's office as a whole, the theory of functions and other areas of activity of the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation is being developed and improved, many other issues are being investigated that contribute to a clearer structuring of prosecutorial science, the division of scientific work and the deepening of scientific knowledge about prosecutorial activity in certain spheres of public relations.

At the same time, it should be noted that despite the long period of existence of this scientific approach, the work of a huge number of scientists working on the justification of the independence of this branch of knowledge, the development of a clear structure of this science, in the passport of the scientific specialty 5.1.2 – "Public law (state law) sciences" prosecutor's science is given an undeservedly modest place. Item 11 "Prosecutor's office in the system of public authority" is devoted directly to the research of prosecutorial subjects in the passport of the scientific specialty 5.1.2. "Public law (state law) sciences". Of course, the multifunctional activity of the prosecutor's office is associated with other areas of scientific research that are part of the structure of the scientific specialty 5.1.2, such as legal regulation of law enforcement and human rights activities; public law mechanism for ensuring the security of the individual, society and the state; legal regulation of public administration in various fields; public control and supervision in public law and private law spheres; state and municipal service. However, in these spheres of public life, the role of the prosecutor's office is so specific that it can claim to be a separate subject of scientific research in the structure of a scientific specialty 5.1.2.

Despite the "consolidation of scientific specialties", the issue of the place of prosecutorial supervision over the execution of laws by bodies carrying out operational investigative activities, inquiry and preliminary investigation in the system of scientific specialties remained unresolved. Thus, the passport of the scientific specialty 5.1.4 "Criminal law sciences" in paragraph 5 contains a section "Prosecutor's supervision". At the same time, there is no indication of which legislation is being implemented and by which authorities this prosecutor's supervision is carried out, which does not seem to be entirely correct. In practice, this will inevitably lead to the fact that dissertation research on issues of prosecutorial supervision over the execution of laws by bodies carrying out operational investigative activities, inquiry and preliminary investigation will be submitted for defense both in the scientific specialty 5.1.2 - "Public law (state law) sciences" and in the scientific specialty 5.1.4. – "Criminal Law Sciences".

In this regard, it is proposed to formulate the directions of scientific research on prosecutorial topics included in the structure of the scientific specialty 5.1.2 "Public law (state law) sciences", based on the best achievements of scientists in the field of prosecutorial science, to develop a more detailed content of the specialty 5.1.2 "Public law (state law) sciences" in parts of the theory of prosecutorial activity in the Russian Federation. In our view, the directions of scientific research on prosecutorial science and included in the structure of scientific specialty 5.1.2 "public law (public law) of science" should include the following issues: the constitutional and legal foundations of the activities of public prosecutors; constitutional law and the role of the prosecution in its provision; the activity of bodies of Prosecutor's office to ensure the unity of the legal space; constitutional values in the doctrine of constitutional law and practice of the prosecution office in the system of public authorities; social and legal significance of the activities of public prosecutors office at publicly-legal mechanism of ensuring the security of individuals, society, of the state; the legal acts of bodies of Prosecutor's office; the part of the Prosecutor's office in law-making activities; the system functions of the prosecution office at the human rights system of the Russian Federation; the system of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation and the structure of its authorities, military and other specialized Prosecutor's office in the system of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation; principles of organization and activities of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation; current state and prospects of development of the powers of the Prosecutor on supervision of observance of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the implementation of legislation, supervision over observance of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen; legal and institutional framework for ensuring the prosecution of constitutional rights and freedoms of man and citizen, in interaction with the institutions of civil society; the legal and organizational bases of activity of the Prosecutor's office in emergency situations; theoretical and legal framework of participation of the Prosecutor in the proceedings on cases of administrative offenses; the procedural status of the Prosecutor as a participant of proceedings on administrative violations: problems of regulation, implementation and improvement; the legal status of the Prosecutor; the current state and prospects of development of educational work in the system of the Prosecutor's office of the Russian Federation; the problems of using information and telecommunication networks and digital technologies in the activities of public prosecutors; theoretical foundations of the effectiveness of prosecutorial activities.

Thus, summing up, it should be noted that at present there is a steady trend towards the separation of prosecutorial science into an independent branch of scientific knowledge, characterized by the activities of scientists, the presence of their own scientific organizations and institutions, scientific schools and communities, and, finally, the division and cooperation of scientific knowledge and scientific work.

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the research in the article submitted for review is, as its name implies, prosecutorial science. The author focused his attention on the study of its current state and development trends. The declared boundaries of the study are fully respected by the scientist. The methodology of the research is not disclosed in the text of the article, but it is obvious that the author used universal dialectical, logical, historical, formal and legal research methods. The relevance of the research topic chosen by the author is undeniable and justified as follows: "As you know, on 02/24/2021, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation approved a new nomenclature of scientific specialties (Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation No. 118 dated 02/24/2021), according to which the degrees of candidate of Sciences and Doctor of Sciences are awarded, which led, in fact, to the so-called "consolidation of scientific specialties". In this regard, many scientific specialties, including those included in the social sciences, humanities, and law, have been merged. This process also fully affected the previously existing scientific specialty 12.00.11 – "Judicial activity, prosecutorial activity, human rights and law enforcement activities", which to a large extent turned out to be included in the scientific specialty 5.1.2 – "Public law (state law) sciences". It is not explicitly stated what the scientific novelty of the work is. In fact, it manifests itself in a number of conclusions and suggestions of the author: "... currently, there is a steady trend towards the separation of prosecutorial science into an independent branch of scientific knowledge. Moreover, scientific research in this area contributes to the fact that the concept of "Prosecutorial supervision" as a science has gradually been transformed into a broader "Prosecutorial activity" [5, p. 12-15] and, finally, "Prosecutorial science" [6, p. 125-130]"; "... despite the long period of existence of this scientific the approach, the work of a huge number of scientists working on the justification of the independence of this branch of knowledge, the development of a clear structure of this science, in the passport of the scientific specialty 5.1.2 – "Public law (state law) sciences" prosecutor's science is given an undeservedly modest place"; "... it is proposed when formulating areas of scientific research on prosecutorial topics included in the the structure of the scientific specialty 5.1.2 "Public law (state law) sciences", based on the best achievements of scientists in the field of prosecutorial science, to develop a more detailed content of the specialty 5.1.2 "Public law (state law) sciences" in terms of the theory of prosecutorial activity in the Russian Federation", etc. Thus, the article makes a certain contribution to the development of domestic legal science and, of course, deserves the attention of the readership. The scientific style of the research is fully sustained by the author. The structure of the work is not entirely logical in the sense that the final part of the article cannot be clearly separated from the main part. In the introductory part of the article, the scientist substantiates the relevance of his chosen research topic. In the main part of the work, the author gives a brief overview of the formation of prosecutorial science and its formation into an independent branch of scientific knowledge, identifies trends in its development, and makes recommendations for improving its content. The content of the article fully corresponds to its title and does not cause any special complaints. The bibliography of the study is presented by 5 sources (monographs and scientific articles). From a formal and factual point of view (taking into account the focus of the study) That's quite enough. The nature and number of sources used in writing the article allowed the author to reveal the research topic with the necessary depth and completeness. There is an appeal to the opponents, but it is of a general nature. The scientific discussion is conducted by the author correctly. The provisions of the article are justified to the necessary extent. There are conclusions based on the results of the study, they have the properties of scientific novelty, reliability and validity, but they are dispersed throughout the main part of the article. They need to be combined in the final part of the work. The article needs additional proofreading. There are typos in it. The interest of the readership in the article submitted for review can be shown primarily by specialists in the field of theory of state and law, constitutional law, and prosecutorial science, provided that it is finalized: disclosure of the research methodology, clarification of the structure of the work, formulation of clear and specific conclusions based on the results of the study, elimination of violations in the design of the article.

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The subject of the research in the presented article is prosecutorial science, taking into account its current state and development trends. Theoretical methods such as analysis and synthesis were used in this article as the methodology of the subject area of research. The relevance of the article is beyond doubt, since the so-called consolidation of scientific specialties took place in connection with the entry into force on 02/24/2021 of the order by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, which approved a new nomenclature of scientific specialties (Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation dated 02/24/2021 No. 118), according to which the degrees of Candidate of Sciences and Doctor of Sciences are awarded, and accordingly, many scientific specialties, including those included in the social, humanitarian, and legal sciences, were merged, which directly affected the previously existing scientific specialty 12.00.11 – "Judicial activity, prosecutorial activity, human rights and law enforcement activities", which largely turned out to be included in the scientific specialty 5.1.2 – "Publicly-legal (state-legal) sciences" The scientific novelty of the research lies in the analysis of the concepts of "Prosecutorial supervision", "Prosecutorial activity" and "Prosecutorial science" and their correlation in the scientific literature. The article is presented in the language of scientific style with a very competent use of legal terms and definitions. The structure is designed taking into account all the requirements for writing scientific articles, namely, it includes such basic structural elements as an introduction, a literature review, basic materials, theoretical generalizations and conclusions, conclusion and bibliography. The content of the article reflects its structure. Especially valuable in the content of the study is the analysis of various points of view of famous scientists on the formation and development of prosecutorial science, as well as its formation within the framework of well-known scientific schools formed on the basis of well-known scientific educational organizations in Russia. The bibliography contains 6 sources, including domestic periodicals and non-periodicals of both the Soviet period and the modern period. Since the presented research is theoretical in nature and contains a large number of different points of view of famous scientists on the formation and formation of prosecutorial science, then in this article an appeal to the terms and definitions used by prosecutorial science, which are found in well-known scientific schools and well-known scientists, is inevitable. The presented study contains brief conclusions concerning the subject area of the study, taking into account the current state of prosecutorial science and its main directions and development trends in the future. The materials of this study are intended for a wide range of readership, they can be interesting and used by scientists for scientific purposes, teaching staff in the educational process, practicing employees of the prosecutor's office, investigation and inquiry, as well as judicial authorities in the preparation of reference materials and explanatory notes on the stated topic. As disadvantages of this study, it should be noted that the methodology of the subject of research was not clearly defined in the article, and the sources in the bibliographic list, despite their scientific and theoretical significance, are not very different in novelty, the "youngest" non–periodic source has the year of publication 2012, and the periodic source has the year of publication 2014, and the rest presented the sources in the bibliography are more than 10 years old. However, these remarks do not detract from the quality of the presented research and its undoubted high theoretical significance, but are more advisory in nature. The article is recommended for publication.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.