Judicial Nature of Evidence in Criminal Proceeding
The urgency of the problem stated in the article is conditioned by the necessity to determine the legal nature of the evidence in criminal proceedings and the evolution of the views of domestic scientists on this legal phenomenon. The purpose of the article is to consider the legal nature of the evidence in criminal proceedings and to determine their legal structure. The main approach to the study of this problem was to conduct a methodological analysis of the phenomena of ‘concept’ and ‘definition’, on the basis of which it was argued that judicial evidence has no essence, and only the function of being a symbolic representative of a certain factum probans (from Latin – something that should be proved). The publication concludes that the evidence in criminal proceedings is the result of human thinking operations and can be represented by the methodological construction ‘composition of criminal-judicial evidence’, which includes regulatory-procedural, knowledge, fact-finding and judicial-interpretation segments. In addition, the opinion expressed the inappropriateness of fixing evidence in the criminal procedural law and proposed a pragmatic approach to this issue, which is in line with current European jurisprudence. The materials of the article represent both theoretical and practical value. They can be used for further scientific investigation of evidence in criminal proceedings, as well as for a proper understanding and enforcement of law enforcement criminal proceedings.
 Balakshin, V.S. 2005. Evidence in the theory and practice of criminal procedure evidence. The most important problems in the light of the code of criminal procedure of the Russian Federation. Ural State Law Academy.
 Berezkin, Yu.M. 2010a. Metafinance: statement of the problem. http://berezkin.info/?page_id=2.
 Berezkin, Yu.M. 2010b. Seven touches on methodology. Publishing House of BSUEP.
 Berezkin, Yu.M. 2012. Foundations of the activity methodology. Publishing House of BSUEP.
 Bocharov, D. 2014. The doctrine of the sign as a methodological basis of the theory of evidence. Law of Ukraine 4:166-172.
 Bulgaria’s Criminal Procedure Code. 2005. https://www.twirpx.com/file/1097891/.
 Cassirer, E. 2006. Cognition and reality. The concept of substance and the concept of function. Gnosis.
 Criminal Procedure Code of the Czech Republic. 1961. https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/6371/file/Czech%20Republic_CPC_1961_am2012_en.pdf.
 Dorokhov, V.Ya. 1973. The concept of evidence. Theory of evidence in the Soviet criminal process. Legal Literature.
 Dvoretskiy, I.K. 1976. Latin-Russian dictionary. Russian Language.
 Gmyrko, V. 2003. Legal definition of the ‘general’ concept of evidence: whether to store in the new PDA. Law of Ukraine 11: 101-106.
 Gmyrko, V. 2014. Criminal evidence: legal concept or definition. Law of Ukraine 10: 26-35.
 Gmyrko, V.P. 2002. Criminal procedural evidence: concept, structure, characteristics, classification. Summary of a problem lecture. Academy of Customs Service of Ukraine.
 Grinchenko, B. (Ed.). 1996. Dictionary of the Ukrainian language. Scientific Opinion.
 Karavansky, S. 2012. Practical dictionary of synonyms of the Ukrainian language. Bak.
 Mikheenko, M.M. 1984. Proving in the Soviet criminal trial. Vyshcha Shkola.
 Moldova’s Criminal Procedure Code. 2003. https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/5509a3794.pdf.
 Orlov, Yu.K. 2009. Problems of evidence theory in criminal proceedings. Lawyer.
 Pogoretsky, M.A. 2015. A new concept of criminal procedural evidence. Bulletin of Criminal Proceedings 3: 63 79.
 Popov, S.V. 1989. On the construction of concepts. http://berezkin.info/?page_id=146.
 Ratz, M.M. 2010. Politics and management. http://www.park.futurerussia.ru/extranet/about/life/2061/.
 Shchedrovitsky, G.P. 1984. Lectures in Soyuzmor NII proekt: lectures 6-8. http://berezkin.info/?page_id=171.
 Shumylo, M.E. 2015. The concept of evidence in criminal proceedings: prolegomena to understanding the ‘elusive’ phenomenon of evidential law. Bulletin of Criminal Justice 3: 95-104.
 Shumylo, M.E. 2018. Legal construction of evidence in criminal proceedings. Bulletin of Criminal Justice 1: 59 67.
 The great interpretive dictionary of modern Ukrainian. 2001. http://lingvodics.com/dics/details/1100/.
 Vapniarchuk, V.V. 2015. Concerning the notion of evidence in criminal proceedings. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhgorod National University 32(3): 114-117.
 Vapniarchuk, V.V. 2018. Theoretical basis of criminal procedural evidence. Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University.
 Zadorozhny, V.D. 2012. ‘Concepts’: the correspondent or failed tracing paper? Our energy efficient home. http://efes-jkg.ucoz.ua/blog/.
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.