The article is devoted to the issue of general provisions conducting procedural actions of a cognitive orientation, which are carried out in the court of first instance during the criminal trial. It is argued that the isolation of such provisions contributes to the interpretation of the norms of criminal procedural law that determine their conduct, makes it possible to apply criminal procedural law by analogy, and to overcome gaps in the regulation of procedural actions of a cognitive orientation in the criminal trial. The general provisions conducting procedural actions of a cognitive nature in the the criminal trial are proposed to be understood as a set of rules and conditions provided for by the criminal procedural law or those arising from it, regarding the conduct of all or most of these actions. Such rules ensure the epistemological efficiency of the procedural actions in question, and the conditions – the exercise of powers by the court, the exercise of rights by the parties and other participants in the the criminal trial during their conduct. The criteria for distinguishing these rules and conditions are comprehensiveness and uniqueness. Taking into account these criteria, the following provisions for conducting procedural actions of a cognitive orientation in the court of first instance are considered general: 1) the presence of grounds for conducting procedural actions of a cognitive orientation; 2) the place and time of their implementation; 3) the choice of these actions and the determination of the sequence of their implementation depends on the position of the parties to the criminal proceedings and is subject to approval by the court; 4) the plurality of participants in conducting procedural actions of a cognitive orientation; 5) organization of implementation and control by the court over compliance with the procedural order for performing such actions; 6) recording the course and results of conducting procedural actions of a cognitive orientation. It is concluded that the general provisions of conducting procedural actions of a cognitive nature in the court of first instance, on the one hand, are characterized by a clearly expressed adversarial principle and increased dispositivity in the study of evidence, which, however, do not exclude the subsidiary activity of the court, and on the other hand, it, as the body conducting the trial, is entrusted with the organization of implementation, control over compliance with the procedural form of implementation and recording the course of such procedural actions. It is stated that despite belonging to the same legal system and a common historical form of criminal proceedings, the legal regulation of evidence using procedural actions of a cognitive orientation in the court of first instance in the criminal procedural law of European states is characterized by peculiarities. Such peculiarities are due to the manifestation of the principles of adversarial nature, dispositiveness, publicity, as well as comprehensive, complete and impartial clarification of the circumstances of the case at the central stage of criminal proceedings. At the same time, such general provisions of procedural actions of a cognitive orientation as the presence of grounds for their conduct, place and time of execution, as well as recording the content and consequences of their implementation remain unchanged, regardless of the normative model of evidence during the trial of criminal proceedings.
V. M. Fihurskyi (Mon,) studied this question.