Determination of Counteraction to Investigation and Abuse of Procedural Rights

Abstract

This article purpose is to determine prerequisites and regularities of the emergence and development of such phenomena as resistance to investigation and abuse of rights in law enforcement activities, as well as their signs. Implementation of the set goal is ensured through the use of a complex of general scientific, special and philosophical research methods (in particular, modeling, dialectical, system-structural and comparative analysis). It is summarized that resistance to investigation is a complex, dynamic and multifaceted phenomenon that is formed in the conditions of a criminal conflict and manifests itself in the purposeful behavior of persons interested in concealing the actual circumstances of a criminal offense. Its activity side consists in committing both active and passive actions that affect the course and results of pre-trial investigation. It was found that counteraction is not chaotic in nature, it is carried out within the limits of a certain mechanism, including three stages: 1) preparation, 2) active implementation of influence on sources of evidentiary information and 3) concealment of traces of committed actions. At the same time, counteraction mechanism is variable and depends on the stage of criminal proceedings, chosen tactical methods and the presence of corrupt, organizational and social connections. It is substantiated that the structural components of the forensic characteristic of counteraction to investigation are: 1) subjects of counteraction, their motives and objects of influence; 2) typical forms and methods of counteraction and their influence on sources of evidentiary information; 3) signs of application of specific methods, reflected in the objective environment and behavior of subjects. It is proved that it is appropriate to study the external manifestations of counteraction (material, digital and ideal traces), since they are the main source for modeling the mechanisms of criminal counteraction and developing effective tactical solutions. It is found that counteraction to investigation has a conflict nature manifested in the clash of opposing goals of the participants in criminal proceedings. This is not only a conflict between the investigator and the suspect, but interaction with the prosecutor, witnesses, witnesses, experts and other participants in the process. Such an environment creates a tense investigative situation that requires a high level of professional adaptability from the investigator. Counteraction is especially dangerous in the context of organized criminal activity characterized by availability of an internal structure, financial resources, technical support and personnel support. It is proved that the forensic characteristic of counteraction to the investigation should be integrated as a separate component into the structure of  investigation methodology for those types of criminal offenses for which active counteraction is characteristic. This approach should be based on: 1) analyzing typical methods and mechanisms of counteraction; 2) studying the subject-role structure of counteraction; 3) studying changes in the trace complex caused by targeted influence on evidence.