SYSTEM-ACTIVITY MODEL OF CONDUCTING FORENSIC EXAMINATION: THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ASPECTS

Abstract

Theoretical substantiation and construction of a comprehensive system-activity model of conducting forensic
examination as a tool for overcoming information uncertainty in criminal proceedings. The research is based on
the principles of the system-activity approach. Modeling methods (to create the structure of expert activity),
structural-functional analysis (to determine the interaction of subjects, objects, and tasks), and the method of
epistemological analysis (to study the nature of information-cognitive deficit) were used. A basic model of the
structure of conducting an examination has been developed, covering subjects, objects, subject matter, purpose,
tasks, and functions as a unified functional system. It is proved that the legitimate epistemological prerequisite for
appointing an examination is "information-cognitive deficit". It is substantiated that in the absence of such a need,
the examination loses procedural justification and transforms into procedural-cognitive redundancy, which does
not create new verifying knowledge but only complicates the structure of evidence. The application of the system-
activity approach to the analysis of forensic examination has been further developed, allowing for a transition
from a static description of the procedural norm to the modeling of its dynamic implementation. It is proposed to
consider the integrity of the internal and external links of the model as a criterion for the judicial assessment of the
admissibility of an expert opinion. The necessity of distinguishing between the objective need for special knowledge
and the formal appointment of an examination, which leads to systemic failures in evidence, is argued. The
developed model serves as a theoretical and methodological framework for creating applied tools to identify
systemic failures and defects in forensic activity. It creates the prerequisites for developing specific algorithms for
judicial verification and evaluation of expert opinions at various stages — from verifying the legitimacy of the
appointment to analyzing the internal integrity of the research results. This establishes a foundation for the
unification of judicial positions and their subsequent transformation into law enforcement standards, which will
contribute to minimizing groundless procedural actions in criminal proceedings.

References

1. Bazhaniuk, V. V. (2023). Pravovi ta orhanizatsiino-taktychni osnovy provedennia ekspertyz u

kryminalnomu provadzhenni [Legal, organizational and tactical bases of conducting examinations in

criminal proceedings] (Doctoral dissertation). Kropyvnytskyi. [in Ukrainian]

2. Vorobchak, A. R. (2019). Vysnovok eksperta yak dzherelo dokaziv u kryminalnomu

provadzhenni [Expert opinion as a source of evidence in criminal proceedings] (Candidate’s thesis). Odesa.

[in Ukrainian]

3. Dudych, A. V. (2017). Ekspert yak uchasnyk kryminalnoho provadzhennia [Expert as a

participant in criminal proceedings] (Candidate’s thesis). Odesa. [in Ukrainian]

4. Protsenko, A. M. (2023). Protsesualni, orhanizatsiini ta taktychni zasady provedennia

ekspertyzy v sudi [Procedural, organizational and tactical principles of forensic examination in court]

(Doctoral dissertation). Kharkiv. [in Ukrainian]

5. Simakova-Yefremian, E. B. (2017). Teoretyko-pravovi ta metodolohichni zasady

kompleksnykh sudovo-ekspertnykh doslidzhen [Theoretical, legal and methodological foundations of

complex forensic expert research] (Doctoral dissertation). Kharkiv. [in Ukrainian]

6. Tymchyshyn, A. M. (2023). Spetsialni znannia u kryminalnomu protsesi Ukrainy: teoriia ta

praktyka [Special knowledge in the criminal process of Ukraine: theory and practice] (Doctoral

dissertation). Kropyvnytskyi. [in Ukrainian]

7. Tkachenko, N. M. (2017). Subiekty sudovo-ekspertnoi diialnosti v suchasnii systemi

ekspertnoho zabezpechennia kryminalnoho provadzhennia [Subjects of forensic activity in the modern

system of expert support of criminal proceedings] (Candidate’s thesis). Kharkiv. [in Ukrainian]

8. Shunevych, K. A. (2023). Modeli orhanizatsii ta provedennia sudovoi ekspertyzy u

kryminalnomu sudochynstvi v derzhavakh Evropy i v Ukraini [Models of organization and conducting

forensic examination in criminal justice in European states and in Ukraine] (Doctoral dissertation). Lviv.

[in Ukrainian]

9. Shcherbakovskyi, M. H. (2016). Teoretyko-metodolohini ta prakseolohichni zasady sudovykh

ekspertyz u kryminalnomu protsesi [Theoretical, methodological and praxeological foundations of forensic

examinations in criminal proceedings] (Doctoral dissertation). Kharkiv. [in Ukrainian]

10. Shcherbaniuk, D. V. (2019). Teoriia ta praktyka realizatsii ekspertnoi initsiatyvy u

kryminalnomu provadzhenni [Theory and practice of expert initiative implementation in criminal

proceedings] (Doctoral abstract). Kharkiv. [in Ukrainian]

11. Yurchyshyn, V. D. (2007). Vysnovok eksperta yak dzherelo dokaziv u kryminalnomu protsesi

Ukrainy [Expert opinion as a source of evidence in the criminal process of Ukraine] (Candidate’s thesis).

Ivano-Frankivsk. [in Ukrainian]

12. Obiednana palata Kasatsiinoho kryminalnoho sudu u skladi Verkhovnoho Sudu. (2019,

November 25). Postanova u spravi No. 420/1667/18 [Resolution in case No. 420/1667/18]. Yedynyi

derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/86070671 [in Ukrainian]

13. Myroshnychenko, Yu. M. (2023). Kryminalistychne zabezpechennia sudovoho

provadzhennia: teoretychni osnovy ta prykladni aspekty [Forensic support of judicial proceedings:

theoretical foundations and applied aspects] (F. F. Volobuiev, Ed.). Uzhhorod: RIK-U. [in Ukrainian]