Challenges in Involving a Specialist by a Defense Counsel in Civil Proceedings

The article studies the problems of attracting a specialist defense lawyer in criminal proceedings. The author examines the main reasons for the opposition of government entities to the right of the defense to present a specialist’s report, which contains a revision of the expert’s report. The legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on issues of expert evidence are noted. In addition, the researcher turns to practical examples of both negative rejection of a specialist’s conclusion as unacceptable criminal procedural evidence, and the positive practice of perceiving a specialist’s conclusion as a basis for ordering a repeat forensic examination and even termination of a criminal case. Ultimately, the author concluded that it is necessary to reform the domestic criminal process in order to increase the efficiency of attracting a specialist defense lawyer as a means of countering criminal prosecution.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Advocate’s practice
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18572/1999-4826-2024-3-17-21
Primary Topic
Dispute Resolution and Class Actions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Challenges in Involving a Specialist by a Defense Counsel in Civil Proceedings

Stanislav O. Buyantuev
Advocate’s practice
Dispute Resolution and Class Actions
article

Challenges in Involving a Specialist by a Defense Counsel in Civil Proceedings

Stanislav O. Buyantuev
article en

Abstract

The article studies the problems of attracting a specialist defense lawyer in criminal proceedings. The author examines the main reasons for the opposition of government entities to the right of the defense to present a specialist’s report, which contains a revision of the expert’s report. The legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on issues of expert evidence are noted. In addition, the researcher turns to practical examples of both negative rejection of a specialist’s conclusion as unacceptable criminal procedural evidence, and the positive practice of perceiving a specialist’s conclusion as a basis for ordering a repeat forensic examination and even termination of a criminal case. Ultimately, the author concluded that it is necessary to reform the domestic criminal process in order to increase the efficiency of attracting a specialist defense lawyer as a means of countering criminal prosecution.

Advocate’s practice
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Dispute Resolution and Class Actions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.