Sub-theory of Standardization of Forensic Activity in the General Theory of Forensic Science
https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2021-2-46-52
Abstract
The article presents the main provisions of the sub-theory of standardization in the forensic expert activity, its place in the theoretical foundations of forensic expertology, and its relationship with other sub-theories of this science.
The author defines the concepts of the subject, the object of the standardization sub-theory in forensic activity, highlights its specifics. The article emphasizes the favorable impact on the development of domestic standardization in forensic activities of foreign experience in the implementation of theoretical developments on standardization, including the formation of a hierarchy of its standards. It is shown that for the development of the sub-theory of standardization in forensic science, it is advisable to use the results of the introduction of standardization mechanisms in the practice of accredited forensic laboratories under the international standard GOST ISO/IEC 17025-2019 “General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories”, taking into account the theoretical foundations of forensic science.
About the Author
E. V. Chesnokova
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation; Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow 109028
Moscow 117198
References
1. Ruzavin G.I. Scientific Theory: Logical and Methodological Analysis. Мoscow: Musl’, 1978. 244 p. (In Russ.).
2. Rossinskaya E.R., Galyashina E.I. & Zinin A.M. Forensic Science Theory (Forensic Expertology). 2nd ed. Moscow: Norma: INFRA-M. 2016. 368 p. (In Russ.).
3. Lebedev N.Yu., Chesnokova E.V. On Approaches to the Subject of Criminalistics and the Theory of Forensics (Forensic Expertology). Tomsk State University Journal of Law. 2020. No. 36. P. 70–82. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17223/22253513/36/7
4. Ustinova I.V. The Relevance of Spatial and Temporal Connections and Relationships for the Formation of a Subtheory of Forensic Forecasting. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2021. Vol. 16. No. 1. P. 54–58. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2021-1-54-58
5. Bebeshko G.I., Voytov S.A., Omel’yanyuk G.G., Usov A.I. Applying Bayesian Methods for Metro-logical Evaluation and Interpretation of Forensic Evidence. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2014. No. 1 (33). P. 148–158. (In Russ.).
6. Usov A.I., Gradusova O.B., Kuz’min S.A. The Use of Probabilistic and Statistical Methods to Test the Significance of Scientific Evidence: Comparative Analysis of Current Forensic Practices in Russia and Abroad. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2018. Vol. 13. No. 4. P. 6–15. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2018-13-4-6-15
7. Aitken C., Roberts P., Jackson G. Fundamentals of Probability and Statistical Evidence in Criminal Proceedings. Guidance for Judges, Lawyers, Forensic Scientists and Expert Witnesses. London: Royal Statistical Society’s Working Group on Statistics and the Law, 2010. 121 p.
8. Gradusova O.B., Kuz’min S.A., Selin A.I., Govorina N.V., Voitov S.A. ENFSI Guideline for Evaluative Reporting in Forensic Science: Annotated Translation. Moscow: RFCFS, 2018. 128 p. (In Russ.)
9. Martire K.A., Ballantyne K.N., Bali A., Edmond G., Kempa R.I., Found B. Forensic Science Evidence: Naive Estimates of False Positive Error Rates and Reliability. Forensic Science International. 2019. Vol. 302. 109877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.109877
10. Bali A.S., Edmond G., Ballantyne K.N., Kemp R.I., Martire K.A. Communicating Forensic Science Opinion: An Examination of Expert Reporting Practices // Science & Justice. 2020. Vol. 60. No. 3. P. 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2019.12.005
11. Guo H., Hou J. Review of the Accreditation of Digital Forensics in China. Forensic Sciences Research. 2018. Vol. 3. No. 3. P. 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2018.1503526
12. Chesnokova E.V. Building of Knowledge on Standardization of Forensic Expert Activities in Russia. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2021. Vol. 16. No. 1. P. 141–151. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2021-1-141-151
13. Panhwar A., Naeem M.A., Zainulibad S., Ahmed M., Haq A., Haq S. Laboratory Quality Improvement by ISO/IEC-17025 Accreditation: A Case Study of PCSIR. International Journal of Current Research. 2020. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 9942–9945. https://doi.org/10.24941/ijcr.37844.01.2020
14. Panhwar A., Memon A.R., Naeem A., Ibad S., Haq A. Qaisar S. Responsibilities and Qualities of an Assessor/Auditor as per ISO/IEC Standards. International Journal of Current Research. 2020. Vol. 12. No. 02. P. 10223–10226. https://doi.org/10.24941/ijcr.38082.02.2020
15. Islek D.S., Yukseloglu E.H. Accreditation of Forensic Science Laboratories in Turkey in the Scope of TS EN ISO/IEC 17025:2017 Standard. Medicine Science. 2018. Vol. 7. No. 4. P. 962–966. https://doi.org/10.5455/medscience.2018.07.8885
16. Smirnova S.A., Usov A.I., Omel’yanyuk G.G., Bebeshko G.I., Korol S.G. Practice of Accreditation of Forensic Laboratories of the Ministry of Justice of Russia on Compliance with ISO/MEK 17025. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2011. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 40–56. (In Russ).
Review
For citations:
Chesnokova E.V. Sub-theory of Standardization of Forensic Activity in the General Theory of Forensic Science. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2021;16(2):46-52. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2021-2-46-52
Views:
747
Email this article 