Proof in the Science of the Criminal Process in Ukraine: Conceptual Approaches to Understanding the Essence

• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20946924
• Author: Anush R. Tumanyanc,Viacheslav V. Vapniarchuk,Oksana V. Kaplina,Mykola Ye. Shumylo
• Published date: 01 February 2021
• Date: 01 February 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20946924

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2021, Vol. 65(2-3) 205 –220

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20946924

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Proof in the Science of the

Criminal Process in Ukraine:

Conceptual Approaches to

Understanding the Essence

Viacheslav V. Vapniarchuk1, Oksana V. Kaplina1,

Mykola Ye. Shumylo2, and Anush R. Tumanyanc1

Abstract

With the reformation of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation and the conviction

of individual scholars in the necessity of applying a methodological approach to

scientific research, new ideas on the nature and procedure of criminal procedural

evidence have started to emerge in the domestic scientific literature. The purpose

of the paper is to distinguish scientific concepts to criminal procedural proof

and substantiation of the expediency of isolation and use of the complex and

systemic approach. This study of criminal procedural proof was performed using

a methodological approach, the essence of which is to change the attention of the

researcher from the object as such to the means and methods of their own thought.

The application of an activity-based methodological approach in scientific research

allows us to further develop other conceptual ideas about criminal procedural

proof, which will contribute to a deeper and more complete study of this legal

phenomenon.

Keywords

scientific approaches to the essence of proof, cognitive approach, activity approach,

integrated approach, complex and systemic approach

1Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Kharkiv, Ukraine

2Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine

Corresponding Author:

Viacheslav V. Vapniarchuk, Department of Criminal Procedure, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University,

77 Pushkinska Str., Kharkiv 61024, Ukraine.

Email: vapniarchuk5314@kpi.com.de

946924IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X20946924International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyVapniarchuk et al.

research-article2020

206 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 65(2-3)

Introduction

The development of the science of the domestic criminal procedure necessitates the

study and revision of conventional scientific views on criminal procedural proof in

general and the specifics of the exercise of evidentiary activity in particular. We shall

note that for a rather long period of time, the scientific literature was dominated by one

approach to proof, which was to consider its essence as a kind of universal cognitive

activity with its inherernt specifics. Such state of affairs, in our opinion, has led to a

certain one-sidedness of the search and staleness of scientific achievements.

With the reformation of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation and the convic-

tion of individual scholars in the necessity of applying a methodological approach to

scientific research, new ideas on the nature and procedure of criminal procedural evi-

dence have started to emerge in the domestic scientific literature. Such state of affairs

necessitates the identification of various conceptual approaches to proving and per-

forming their critical analysis, which will facilitate the further scientific search of this

legal phenomenon, the development of proposals for improvement of statutory regula-

tion and implementation of evidential activity. It is these circumstances that explain

the relevance of this article, its logic and content.

During the historical development of the national theory of proof (the doctrine of

proof), various ideas have taken place both as to the nature of criminal procedural

proof at large and to its individual institutions, categories and concepts. In this publica-

tion, for a deeper and fuller disclosure of the question raised, we consider it necessary

not just to analyze the various scientific works and to define certain views, but to try

to organize them by identifying scientific approaches (interpretations, concepts)

regarding proof. From the standpoint of content and functional understanding of crim-

inal procedural proof, that is, in terms of what scientists have invested in the content

of proof and its main focus, we believe that there are several conceptual approaches.

Such national scientists as M. M. Mykheienko, Yu. M. Hroshevyi, S. M. Stakhivskyi,

V. P. Gmyrko, M. A. Pogoretskyi, and V. V. Vapniarchuk have holistically researched

the issue of the essence of proof in the criminal procedure of Ukraine in their works.

Materials and Methods

The problem of criminal procedural proof has always attracted the attention of law-

yers. However, it should be noted that in their scientific research, most scientists have

used a naturalistic (scientific) methodological approach to proof, exploring it as an

object of nature, with certain characteristics. This scientific study of criminal proce-

dural proof was performed using a methodological approach, the essence of which is

to change the attention of the researcher from the object as such to the means and

methods of their own thought. After all, ideas about the object are defined and deter-

mined not only and not so much by the material of nature, but by the means and meth-

ods of our mental activity. Different tools and methods used by the researcher will

yield different qualities and properties of results on the output. Due to the use of the

most active methodological approach in Ukrainian criminal procedural science,