The powers of the head of the investigative body and the prosecutor at the end of the preliminary investigation in russian criminal proceedings

Resumen

Objective: The article focuses on the division of authority between the head of the investigative body and the prosecutor during the final phase of the investigation process. This phase is critical, as it involves reviewing the investigation's findings, compiling procedural documents, and deciding the future of the case (whether it goes to court, is dismissed, or requires further action). There is significant academic debate surrounding the current power structure, which the article aims to address.

Materials and Methods: The authors employ a systematic scientific method to study the procedural, organizational, and managerial aspects of the powers of the investigative body head and the prosecutor. Analysis and synthesis methods are applied to identify issues in how these powers are exercised during the final phase of preliminary investigations. Additionally, statistical data on these practices are collected and evaluated to support the research.

Results and Discussion: The article highlights various outcomes at the end of preliminary investigations, including the preparation of indictments, rulings on compulsory measures, and case dismissals. The authors discuss problems that arise due to inconsistencies in the roles of the investigative body head and the prosecutor. Using case law, they illustrate situations where procedural errors led to overturned verdicts, underscoring the need for clearer delineation of responsibilities. Key cases from Russian courts are used to emphasize the importance of careful coordination and scrutiny of criminal cases before they proceed to court.

Conclusions: The authors conclude that recent reforms have enhanced the role of the head of the investigative body, increasing their responsibility for decisions made by subordinate investigators. However, they express concern that some proposed reforms—such as transferring more powers from the prosecutor to the head of the investigative body—could lead to inefficiencies and imbalance in the criminal justice system. They recommend improving existing practices rather than enacting further legislative changes that could complicate the system.