The article analyzes the approaches of representatives of different scientific schools to the definition of the evidence concept in the criminal process. Attention is drawn to the fact that the correct definition of the concept of “evidence” is a necessary condition for resolving actions and achieving the goals that arise in criminal proceedings, which should affect the whole range of activities of law enforcement agencies to search, collect, fix and the use of evidence during preparatory and judicial proceedings. The formation of the concept of evidence in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Belarus and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan is considered, and it is concluded that unlike the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, they should not contain a reference to the fact that the evidence must be collected only in accordance with the rules of criminal procedural law.

It is emphasized that the correct assessment and classification of the evidence base is aimed at making sound and reasonable decisions in criminal proceedings, which is the basis of any judicial process.

Brief content is given, which is included in the notion of “evidence”, since it significantly influences the establishment of the rights and obligations of the members of criminal justice, which, in turn, is organically related to the implementation of the principles of proof and the law of such issues as the adherence and admissibility of evidence.

The views of scientists on the classification of evidence by separate criteria are considered. It is emphasized that the correct classification has a theoretical and practical significance for the consideration of the case, and the determination of the nature of the evidence allows it to be further evaluated and to direct criminal proceedings to obtain new evidence.

Key words: evidence, criminal process, factual data, classification of evidence.

References

1. Dorokhov, V. Ya. (1964), “The concept of evidence in the Soviet criminal trial”, Soviet Sovereignty and Right, № 9, рр. 108–117.
2. Prylutskyi, P. V. (2014), “The notion of evidence in modern criminal procedural law of Ukraine”, Law of Ukraine, № 10, рр. 36–41.
3. Orlov, Yu. K. (2001), Fundamentals of the theory of evidence in the criminal process, Prospect, Moscow.
4. Sheifer, S. A. (2009), Evidence and Proof in Criminal Cases: Problems of Theory and Legal Regulation, Moscow.
5. Kostenko, R. V. (2006), Evidence in the criminal process (conceptual approaches and prospects for legal regulation), Krasnodar.
6. Vladimirov, L. Е. (1916), The doctrine of criminal evidence, Petersbourg.
7. Sluchevskyi, V. K. (1913), Textbook of the Russian criminal process, Petersbourg.
8. Ivanov, N. A. (2012), “On the notion of evidence in the criminal process”, Bulletin of the Omsk Law Institute, № 1 (18), рр. 47–50.
9. Stopin, V. S., Huseinov, А. А., Semihin, H. Yu., Ohurtsov, А. P. (in Ad.) (2010), New philosophical encyclopedia, Thought, Moscow.
10. Ukraine (2001), Criminal Code of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine, The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Kyiv.
11. Loboiko, L. М. (2014), “Correlation of pre-trial investigation and evidence”, Law of Ukraine, № 10, рр. 82–88.
12. Republic of Belarus (2009), Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus, Minsk.
13. Republic of Kazakhstan (2011), Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Astana.
14. Tertishnik, V. М. (2014), Scientific and Practical Commentary on the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, Alerta, Kharkiv.
15. Hroshevyi, Yu. M., Tatsyi, V. Ya., Tumaniants, A. R. (2012), Criminal process, Law, Kharkiv.
16. Hroshevyi, Yu. М. (2010), Criminal procedural evidence and operative-investigative activity, Law, Kharkiv.
    
    [collapse]