The Expert Initiative Right from a Perspective of Legal Hermeneutics
https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2019-14-2-115-127
Abstract
The article is devoted to the analysis of one of the rights forming the procedural status of a forensic expert, that is the right of expert initiative. The right is considered not only from a procedural point of view, but also in the context of professional, moral and ethical standards that should guide a forensic expert in his activities. The right of expert initiative is considered as a professional responsibility of an expert. From the perspective of legal hermeneutics an attempt is made to identify its direct recipient and more importantly - the form of realization of this right by the expert. The norm in question is examined within the context of regulatory legal acts and in this connection, we try to understand the content of this norm considering the basic principle of forensic expert activity - the objectivity principle and the complementary principles of comprehensiveness and completeness of a research. The question is raised of the mandatory nature of the norm for the expert regardless of the procedural form of its implementation.
About the Author
A. A. Boitsov
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Russian Ministry of Justice; Moscow City Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksei Aleksandrovich Boitsov – Deputy Head of the Laboratory of Forensic Linguistics
Moscow 129226
References
1. Efremova N.N. Legal Dialogue and Justice in a Context of History of the Russian Justice. State and Law. 2011. No. 10. P. 85–94. (In Russ.)
2. Hmyz A.I. To a Question about Expert Prevention in the Production of Judicial Expertise. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2019. No. 1. P. 105–108. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24411/2073-0454-2019-10027
3. Nikitina I.E. Current Issues in Justice and Home Affairs Cooperation between EU Member States Pertaining to Forensic Services and Investigative Operations. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2017. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 110– 118. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2017-12-3-110-118
4. Maiorova E.I. Peculiarities of Expert Preventive Inspection in the Process of Judicial Ecological Expertise. The Law and the State. 2018. No. 3–4 (80–81). P. 144–154. (In Russ.)
5. Belkin R.S. Forensics. Brief encyclopedia. Moscow: Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1993. 111 p. (In Russ.)
6. Zaitseva E.A. The Concept of Development of the Forensic Science Institution in the Conditions of Adversarial Criminal Proceedings. Monograph. Moscow: Yurlitinform, 2010. 437 p. (In Russ.)
7. Melnik S.L. On the Boundaries of the Expert Initiative. Bulletin of the Kaliningrad branch of the St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2017. No. 2 (28). P. 20–22. (In Russ.)
8. Melnik S.L., Revenko Ya. D. On the Question of the Formation of the Institute of Expert Initiative in the Production of Forensic Enquiry in the Russian Federation. Journal of Russian Law. 2017. No 2. P. 124–130. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.12737/24123
9. Smirnova S.A. (ed.) Encyclopedic Dictionary of Forensic Science. Multimodal Edition “Forensic Science: Reboot”. Part 2. Moscow: EKOM, 2012. 455 p. (In Russ.)
10. Orlov Yu.K. The issues of the theory of evidence in criminal proceedings. Moscow: Yurist, 2009. 175 p. (In Russ.)
11. Yarovenko V.V. Expert Initiative in the Modern Expert Practice. Legal Studies. 2017. No. 6. (In Russ.). http://e-notabene.ru/lr/article_22855.html
12. Gorbulinskaya I.N. On the Initiative of the Expert. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2017. № 2. P. 41–42. (In Russ.)
13. Grishina Е.P. Mistakes of Expert’s Initiative. Expert-Criminalist. 2012. № 2. P. 9–10. (In Russ.)
14. Mishin A.V. Forensic Examination in Pre-Trial Proceedings in a Criminal Case. Study guide. Kazan: Kazan Federal University, 2017. 94 p. (In Russ.)
15. Frolova A.V. The Right of Expert Initiative and Expert Prevention in the Modern Criminal Process. Problems of technological safety and sustainable development. 2011. Issue 2. P. 277–281. (In Russ.)
16. Eksarkhopulo A.A., Makarenko I.A., Zainullin R.I. Criminalistics: History and Development Prospects. Monograph. Moscow: Yurait, 2019. 167 p. (In Russ.)
17. Vladimirov L.E. The Theory of Criminal Evidence. Tula: Autograph, 2000. 462 p. (In Russ.)
18. Belkin R.S. Course of Forensics. In 3 volumes. Vol. 3. Forensic means, techniques and recommendations. Moscow: Yurist’’, 1997. 480 p. (In Russ.)
19. Krupenya E.M. The Interpretation of Law, Legal Hermeneutics in the Context of the Subject Approach. In: Tonkov E.N. and Chestnov I.L. (eds.) Paradigms of Legal Hermeneutics. Saint Petersburg: Aletheia, 2017. P. 219–234. (In Russ.)
20. Efremova N.N. The Interpretation of Law: Formation of Doctrine and Practice in the Russian Empire. XVIII – the first half of the XIX century / In: Paradigms of Legal Hermeneutics. Saint Petersburg: Aletheia, 2017. P. 383–392. (In Russ.)
21. Vetyutnev Yu.Yu. The Procedural Nature of Legal Hermeneutics / In: Paradigms of Legal Hermeneutics. Saint Petersburg: Aletheia, 2017. P. 133–141. (In Russ.)
22. Chestnov I.L. History and Methodology of Legal Science: A Textbook. M.: Infra-M, 2018. 283 p. (In Russ.)
23. Chestnov I.L. Interpretation of the reproduction of legal reality mechanism / In: Paradigms of Legal Hermeneutics. Saint Petersburg: Aletheia, 2017. P. 33–72. (In Russ.)
24. Smirnova S.A., Miklyaeva O.V. The Principle of Legality in Forensic Practice. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2015. No. 1 (37). P. 10–15. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2015-1-10-15
25. Alexy R. Begriff und Geltung des Rechts. Translated from German by Laptev A.N., Kal’shoiera F. Moscow: Infotropic Media, 2011. 192 p. (In Russ.)
26. Mailis N.P. Ethics Norms in expert activity. Vestnik Volgograd Academy of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia = Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2011. No. 9. P. 162– 165. (In Russ.)
27. Maylis N.P. The Etiquette of Court Expert as a Component of Professional Ethics in Forensic Activities. Forensic Examination of Belarus. 2017. No. 1 (4). P. 28–32. (In Russ.)
28. Vermylen Y. The Role of the Forensic Expert in Criminal Procedures according to Belgian Law. Forensic Sci. Int. 2010. Vol. 201. No. 1–3. P. 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.04.017
29. Hissa J., Freunda M., Kahanab T. The forensic expert witness – An issue of competency. Forensic Sci. Int. 2007. Vol. 168. No. 2–3. P. 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.06.004
30. Fusaro N. The Role of the Expert, of the Technical Consultant and of the Consultant for the Defensive Investigations in the Criminal Trial. Forensic Sci. Int. 2004. Vol. 146. Suppl. P. S219–S220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.09.067
31. Kukushkina O.V., Safonova Yu.A., Sekerazh T.N. Methodology of Conducting Complex Forensic Psychological and Linguistic Examination of in Cases Connected with Counteraction to Extremism and Terrorism. Moscow: RFCFS, 2014. 98 p. (In Russ.)
32. Izotova T.M, Kuznetsov V.O., Plotnikova A.M. Forensic Linguistics in Cases on Insult. Moscow: RFCFS, 2016. 90 p. (In Russ.)
33. Plotnikova A.M., Kuznetsov V.O., Sazhenin I.I. et al. Semantic Research in Forensic Linguistics. A Handbook . S.A. Smirnova (ed.). Moscow: RFCFS. 2018. 136 p. (In Russ.)
34. Ricoeur P. Le conflit des interpretations. Essais d’hermeneutique / Trans. from French by I.S. Vdovina. Moscow: Academic Project, 2008. 695 p. (In Russ.)
35. Dworkin R. Taking Rights Seriously / Trans. from English by M.D. Lakhutie, L.B. Makeeva. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2004. 392 p. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Boitsov A.A. The Expert Initiative Right from a Perspective of Legal Hermeneutics. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2019;14(2):115-127. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2019-14-2-115-127
Views:
947
Email this article 