Study uncovers the interplay of criminal procedural powers in investigative and inquiry roles, suggesting implications for procedural management.
Aim. To identify the correlation of the criminal procedural powers of the head of the investigative body and the head of the inquiry office in terms of their complementarity, exclusivity and duplication. Methodology. Much attention is paid to the dynamics of the development of the criminal procedural powers of the head of the investigative body and the head of the inquiry office. Results. The development trends in the powers of the procedural leadership performed by the head of the investigative body and the head of the inquiry office are clearly formulated. The author’s division of these powers is based on the hierarchy which is formed between the subject authorities participating in the criminal process. The author points out the priority of the criminal procedural powers of those subject authorities of the criminal process who are higher-level leaders or heads of higher authorities. Research implications. The article is intended to contribute to the study of the criminal procedural powers for the procedural management of the preliminary investigation from the methodological point of view.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A. V. Obraztsov (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: