The subject of the article is the history of the inertia of the imperial model of justice in the Soviet era. The aim of the work is to compare individual elements of the justice bodies in the late imperial and Soviet periods. The goal is also to determine how Soviet justice, while developing, gradually "liberated" itself from the old justice models.

The main methods of the study were comparative analysis and the problem-chronological approach. With the help of the first method, it was possible to identify the main parallels between the justice systems of the 19th and 20th centuries in Russia. The second method helped to understand how the transformation of the Soviet model to its own original version took place.

The main results of the work are expressed in the materials of a comparative study of the evolution of Russian justice bodies in the 20th century. For the first time, an essay is presented on the numerous borrowings or continuous existence of pre-revolutionary justice bodies in the early Soviet period. Not having a clear idea of Soviet justice in the new state, communists and lawyers were forced to borrow ready-made models and structures from the previous period. Moreover, the abolition of old institutions was replaced by returns and copies of old authorities appeared. Thus, in 1922, the pre-revolutionary model of law enforcement agencies was almost completely copied. For example, all justice agencies were subordinate to a single center of power in the person of the People's Commissar of Justice, investigators were subordinate to the courts, the notary office was state-owned, most justice agencies were subordinate to the chairmen of the courts, the district system and the status of people's judges coincided with the system of justices of the peace, etc. Since 1928, justice agencies have gradually transformed, getting rid of their "imperial" nature. Political practice led to the gradual displacement of previous models of justice. The modernization of Soviet public administration led to the formation of exclusively "Soviet" justice agencies, which were finally formed only by the 1980s. Conclusions. By the time of the second Soviet judicial reform (1958), Soviet justice had moved far away from the imperial model. Until the end of the Soviet state, individual rudiments of old models remained, which gradually disappeared. Thus, bailiffs were still subordinate to the courts, plenary sessions of the supreme courts carried out judicial policy, bar associations copied the councils of the imperial barristers, the ministries of justice managed the courts, etc. In the early 1990s, during the new judicial reform, almost all the remnants of the old institutions were transformed into new structures. The author identified the main trends in the development of the Soviet law enforcement system throughout the 20th century. Soviet justice served as the basis for the formation of the new Russian justice. The history of the comparison of the legal system and the internal affairs agencies is the subject of separate studies, which will also show many elements of the relationship between Russian and Soviet history.

The subject. The role of lawmaking in the activities of the state is noted, which substantiates the relevance of its study.

The aim of the article is to identify the organizational forms of lawmaking in the Soviet period, as well as to select tested practices that correspond to the domestic legal tradition and meet the demands of the modern state and law.

The comparative-legal, formal-legal, and institutional methods are used. It allows to demonstrate the evolution of the Soviet legislative process in its unity and diversity throughout the entire Soviet period.

Main results and cocnclusions. The following stages of the organization of legislative work have been identified: the first stage – the end of 1917–1936; the second – 1936 – the mid-1950s; the third – the mid-1950s – the late 1980s. A substantive analysis of the content of each stage has been carried out.

At the first stage, the organization of lawmaking was subordinated to the solution of a strategic task – the creation of Soviet legislation. At the second stage, legislative activity is included in a unified legislative mechanism and acts as a means of centralizing state power and strengthening socialist legality.

At the third stage, such forms of legislative activity were institutionalized that combined the authoritative powers of authorities, scientific institutions, and the legal community. The participation of citizens and individual professional groups in the discussion of draft laws became widespread. This participation was not formal and influenced the content of legislative acts.

The organization of draft law work is presented dynamically, showing the continuity or discreteness of individual organizational methods. The qualitative level of draft law work by the end of the Soviet period was assessed.

The subject of the study is the problems and contradictions in the law enforcement practice regarding the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the Russian Federation. The work focuses on analyzing the discrepancy between the reality of the widespread application of UAS and the capacity of the domestic legal system to effectively regulate the emerging public relations and ensure the rule of law in this area.

The purpose of the article is to confirm the scientific hypothesis about the existence of a systemic crisis in the adaptation of law enforcement mechanisms to the technological challenge posed by UAS. The research is based on a combination of general scientific and specific scientific methods. The authors apply methods of systemic and formal legal analysis to examine current regulatory legal acts. The comparative legal method is used to contrast Russian approaches with the issues discussed in international and foreign scientific literature.

The method of analyzing judicial practice allows for identifying specific gaps and conflicts. The predictive method is employed to formulate proposals for improving the legal and organizational mechanisms.

The conducted research has identified and analyzed a complex of interrelated law enforcement problems in the sphere of UAS: The existing rules fail to account for the ubiquity and technological specifics of unmanned aerial vehicles, creating excessive administrative burden and legal conflicts; The absence of a legislatively mandated algorithm for inter-agency interaction paralyzes the operational response to incidents. The practical impossibility of establishing a specific UAS operator at the moment of violation due to the lack of a universal real-time remote identification system, which nullifies the preventive function of administrative liability; The existing supervisory measures are reactive and sporadic in nature and are not designed for the mass, potentially avalanche-like nature of violations possible with the commercial use of UAS (delivery, air taxi); The study acknowledges the existence of serious challenges in the areas of UAS cyber security, privacy protection, ethics of use. The research objective can be considered achieved. The hypothesis of a systemic law enforcement crisis is confirmed. A transformation of the very approach to risk management in a high-tech environment is required. As a basis for overcoming the crisis, a comprehensive program of systemic changes is proposed, including: creating a digital control infrastructure, specializing control and supervisory activities, improving administrative practice, and forming a system of inter-agency interaction. Only such a systemic transition from a model of retrospective liability to a model of predictive and procedurally ensured risk management will make it possible to create a real, rather than declarative, legal order in the era of unmanned aviation.

Subject. The article examines the draft federal law No. 1058242-8 on the organization of control and supervisory activities in relation to local self-government bodies and their officials within the framework of the unified system of public authority in the Russian Federation. The subject field covers the legal regulation of oversight over municipal authorities, their constitutional status as public bodies and legal entities, and the interaction between federal, regional and local levels of power.

The purpose of the study is to assess whether the proposed draft law is necessary and consistent with the current legislation, and to identify its potential negative and positive effects on the legal position of local self-government bodies. The author aims to reveal contradictions between the draft law and Federal Laws dated July 31, 2020, No. 248-FZ, dated March 20, 2025, No. 33-FZ and dated October 6, 2003, No. 131-FZ, as well as the risks of excessive expansion of control mechanisms over municipalities.

Methodology. The research is based on doctrinal legal analysis of constitutional and federal legislation, including systematic and comparative interpretation of norms regulating local self-government and state control. The authors use case-law and scholarly positions on the dual nature of municipal bodies as public authorities and legal entities, as well as explanatory materials and public statements by state officials and experts regarding the draft law.

Main results. The article describes the evolution of the legal framework of the unified system of public authority, including the adoption of Federal Laws dated December 8, 2020, No. 394-FZ, dated December 21, 2021, No. 414-FZ, dated July 31, 2020, No. 248-FZ and dated March 20, 2025, No. 33-FZ, and the current coexistence of two basic laws on local self-government. It then analyzes the content of draft law No. 1058242-8, its subject and object of control, and the transplantation of risk-based regulation instruments from the sphere of economic activity to municipal public powers. The results show that the draft law duplicates, complicates and expands existing control regimes, strengthens the subordination of local authorities to state bodies, and generates significant legal uncertainty regarding the implementation and redistribution of powers on ensuring the vital activity of the population.

Conclusions. The draft law has more negative than positive aspects and does not meet the declared objectives of reducing the administrative burden on municipalities and optimizing control. Its adoption is likely to deepen instability in the regulation of control and supervisory activities, create overlaps between different control regimes, and increase the probability of normative and managerial collapse when it enters into force simultaneously with the full implementation of Federal Law dated March 20, 2025, No. 33-FZ.

The subject. The article examines the legal nature and management potential of national projects in the Russian Federation as a key instrument of strategic planning, public administration, and control. Despite twenty years of implementation, the legal definition of national projects remains incomplete, and their role as a nationwide (popular) mechanism for achieving development goals requires deeper doctrinal analysis.

Purpose of the study. The study aims to reveal the essence of national projects, to determine their place in the system of strategic planning documents, to substantiate their function as both a management and a control tool, and to propose amendments to the legal definition enshrined in the Federal Law dated June 28, 2014, No. 172-FZ “On Strategic Planning in the Russian Federation”.

Methodology. The research is based on formal legal interpretation, comparative analysis, systemic and structural methods. The authors analyse Russian strategic planning legislation, presidential decrees, government regulations, the Accounts Chamber’s auditing standards, and INTOSAI documents. Theoretical foundations include works by Russian scholars on planning, public administration, and state control.

The main results. The authors reveal that the essence of a national project is “nationwide”, implying not only measurable material outcomes but also changes in citizens’ value attitudes, behaviour, and will. National projects overcome the sectoral limitations of traditional state programmes by enabling cross-programme interaction to achieve seven national development goals. It is demonstrated that national projects serve simultaneously as a project management tool (result-based budgeting), an internal control mechanism (strategic monitoring by planning subjects), and an external audit object (strategic audit by the Accounts Chamber and regional control bodies). The study proposes supplementing the legal definition of a national project with the attribute of “nationwide (popular) character”. A distinction is drawn between strategic control and strategic audit, and the problem of evaluating the correctness of strategic goal-setting (which borders on political discretion) is addressed.

Conclusions. National projects should be understood as nationwide public projects. Their legal definition must reflect their unifying essence. They are not merely strategic planning documents but also a universal mechanism integrating planning, management and control. Effective implementation requires further development of strategic audit and a clear delineation of control over goal-setting from control over execution. Legislatively embedding the proposed attribute will improve the precision of the national project concept and distinguish it from federal projects and state programmes.

This article conducts a theoretical and applied analysis of rudimentary norms within the Russian legal system, using road transport legislation as a primary case study. The research subject is legal prescriptions that have lost their relevance and practical application but remain formally in force. The study aims to confirm the central scientific hypothesis that the biomorphic metaphor of a “rudiment”, borrowed from biology, holds significant heuristic and epistemological value for jurisprudence. It seeks to refine the criteria for identifying such norms, investigate the causes of their emergence, and analyze the problems associated with their elimination.

The methodology is based on a comparative analysis, projecting the biological definition of a rudiment onto legal norms. This is combined with a historical-legal analysis of the genesis of specific provisions, a systemic analysis of the legal framework, and an examination of law enforcement practice to verify their actual application.

The key scientific results of the study include the establishment of a refined, tripartite test for identifying a rudimentary legal norm. The article argues that such a norm must not only have lost its relevance but also must not be implemented in practice, while still remaining formally valid. This “non-application” criterion is crucial as it aligns the legal concept with its biological prototype and provides a more objective measure. The research identifies concrete examples of such norms, such as the outdated term “route taxi” in the Tax Code and the Federal Law on Highways, and the requirement to return bus tickets exclusively "to the cash desk" in the Road Transport Charter. The analysis of their genesis reveals typical causes, including legislative incoordination and technical errors during the lawmaking process. Furthermore, the study diagnoses systemic reasons for the persistence of rudimentary norms, primarily their practical harmlessness, which removes them frolegislative priority, and interdepartmental fragmentation that hinders their elimination, as exemplified by the failed attempt to amend the Road Transport Charter.

In conclusion, the article confirms its initial hypothesis, demonstrating that the concept of a legal rudiment is a valuable tool for understanding the evolutionary nature of law. The research successfully achieves its objective by providing a clearer framework for identification, tracing the origins of specific norms, and highlighting the systemic barriers to their removal. The primary conclusion is that the focus should be shifted from merely eliminating existing rudiments to improving comprehensive legislative expertise and interagency coordination during the bill-drafting stage to prevent such normative anomalies from arising.

The subject of the article is the process of educational integration within the EAEU. In particular, the author examines educational integration in the field of higher legal education. The purpose of the article is to test the hypothesis regarding the possibility of establishing a common educational standard in the field of higher legal education within the EAEU. To achieve this, the author identifies the current model of cooperation in higher legal education across the EAEU, and between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Armenia in particular.

The methodology. The author used general scientific dialectical method of scientific knowledge, the formal-logical method, systematic method and a simulation method.

The main results. The author of the article analyzes the existing mechanisms of educational integration. The well-known problems of cross-border educational cooperation in the EU are described, and gaps in the legal formalization of a potential standardization process for higher legal education within the EAEU are identified. The author concludes that educational integration and standardization in the field of higher legal education within the EAEU is possible but will require adjustments to education legislation.

Conclusions. Based on our research, the EAEU member states' pursuit of a common standard in higher legal education is achievable. However, this process requires overcoming significant barriers and improving existing legislation, both at the integration level and through potential adjustments to national educational legislation. This can be done via direct norms or secondary acts, creating a "second regime" of regulation. Historically inherited Soviet education system of the EAEU states, which underwent transformation through the Bologna Process, may serve as a foundation for further educational integration. However, diverged Russia's recent pilot project to abandon the Bologna Process in favor of a national model (per Presidential Decree No. 343) highlights the challenge of reconciling such national specificities within common EAEU integration standards, a task applicable to all member states' unique legal frameworks.

The research subject. This study focuses on how the technical capabilities of the platform business are currently being used for tax administration purposes in Russia.

The purpose of the research. The purpose of the study is to analyze how the domestic legal regulation of information exchange between tax authorities and platforms has developed and at what stage it is currently. The author also refers to the domestic experience of involving platform businesses in tax payment mechanisms.

Methodology. The research is based on the analysis of national legal regulation, scientific literature and publicly available information from different sources, including mass media.

Main results of the research. The study allowed to determine at what stage the process of involving the platform business in tax administration in Russia is currently at. The main conclusions and critical remarks are formulated.

Conclusion. The study led to the conclusion that the exchange of information between tax authorities and platforms is not always carried out solely for tax purposes. As part of the development of mechanisms for interaction with the platform business various kinds of experiments are actively used, which raise questions about the appropriate level of legal regulation and compliance with the general theoretical structures of tax law.

This paper examines the main problems of determining the procedure for compensating additional expenses to local governments when performing public functions in connection with the adoption of amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 2020 and changes in federal legislation. It examines the history of the issue of compensation for additional costs to local governments and the problems associated with it over the past thirty years. It is noted that with the adoption of the Federal Law on Local Self-Government in 2003, the provisions on compensation for additional expenses incurred with the participation of local self-government bodies in the implementation of decisions taken by public authorities disappeared from federal legislation.

The paper traces how the institution of compensation for additional expenses incurred with the participation of local governments in the implementation of decisions taken by public authorities has changed. How did it turn into an institution for compensating additional expenses to local governments when performing public functions? The author notes that the provisions on this compensation are present only in article 133 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and are still absent from federal laws.

The article presents the main differences between the mechanisms of pre-financing when providing financial resources necessary for the exercise of transferred individual state powers and the subsequent compensation of additional costs to local governments in the performance of public functions, as well as other problematic issues of the mechanism of compensation of additional costs to local governments in the performance of public functions.

These issues are considered in the article using the formal legal method, methods of comparative legal and historical analysis of federal laws governing the compensation of additional costs to local governments, as well as synthesis in the preparation of conclusions and proposals based on this analysis.

Summing up, the author notes that there has never been, and never will be, a procedure for compensating additional costs to local governments when performing public functions in federal legislation! No need to raise the dead! Otherwise, this compensation mechanism will negate all the positive work on the division of powers between the levels of public authority and the establishment of an effective mechanism for granting local governments separate state powers that we have today.

Subject. The article examines administrative coercion in the field of road traffic in the Russian Federation, focusing on legal mechanisms of administrative liability and sanctions applied to drivers. It particularly addresses traffic safety policy within the framework of the national Strategy for improving road safety up to 2030 and towards 2036.

The purpose of the study is to identify key problems and gaps in the legal regulation and law-enforcement practice of applying administrative sanctions in road traffic, including multiple and repeated offences and medically based termination of the right to drive. The authors aim to substantiate proposals for improving legislation and enforcement tools to enhance the preventive function of administrative coercion.

Methodology. The research is based on analysis of Russian administrative and traffic safety legislation, including the Federal Law dated February 7, 2011, No. 3-FZ “On Police”, the Federal Law dated December 10, 1995, No. 196-FZ “On Road Traffic Safety”, and the new federal act on information exchange through medical conclusions. The authors use doctrinal interpretation, comparative legal analysis of regulation in road traffic and in the sphere of arms circulation, and examination of statistical data from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Rosstat on administrative offences and traffic accidents.

Main results. The article describes the current dynamics of administrative offences and road traffic mortality, highlighting the persistence of high accident rates despite a long-term decrease in fatalities. It reveals deficiencies in the regulation of multiple and recurrent offences, the lack of unified mechanisms for accounting and monitoring high-risk drivers (including those with alcohol and drug addiction), and the absence of a clear procedure for terminating the right to drive on medical grounds. The authors show that, unlike the more advanced mechanism in the Federal Law dated December 13, 1996, No. 150-FZ “On Arms”, the road traffic safety regime still lacks effective legal instruments for systematic information exchange between medical organizations and traffic safety authorities.

Conclusions. Qualified detection of diseases and conditions constituting medical contraindications or limitations to driving should be recognized as a sufficient legal basis for terminating the right to operate vehicles. It is proposed to introduce a unified electronic register of medical conclusions, strengthen diagnostic requirements for drivers, and legally oblige competent authorities to consider medical information for prompt termination of driving rights. According to the authors, these measures will significantly contribute to the implementation of the national Strategy for improving road safety, reduce traffic accident rates and mortality, and enhance the preventive effectiveness of administrative coercion in road traffic.

Subject. The article investigates the transformation of the principle of transparency in criminal proceedings under the influence of modern digital technologies. The choice of the research object is driven by a paradigm shift from classical public access to justice towards an active, technologically mediated openness, which necessitates a rethinking of traditional approaches and the formation of a new legal model.

The purpose of the study is to test the scientific hypothesis that modern digital technologies hold significant potential for ensuring systemic transparency in criminal proceedings; however, their implementation requires the establishment of a balanced legal framework that minimizes concomitant risks to privacy, security, and procedural rights. This goal is pursued through a comparative analysis of legal regulation and an empirical study of law enforcement practice.

Methodology. The methodological foundation of the research comprises a set of general scientific and specific scientific methods. These included the dialectical method to analyze the evolution of transparency, the system-structural method to study criminal proceedings as an integrated system, the comparative legal method (using the experience of the People's Republic of China as an example), and the formal legal method to identify gaps in legislation. The empirical base was formed by data from the author's sociological survey of judges, lawyers, prosecutors, investigators, and legal scholars (n = 520), coupled with an analysis of law enforcement practice.

Conclusions. Based on the study results, the following conclusions are drawn: (1) The most promising technologies for ensuring transparency, according to all respondent groups, are artificial intelligence and big data analytics (for overcoming information barriers and enhancing objectivity), blockchain (for creating an immutable and verifiable digital footprint of cases and evidence), and online streaming of court hearings (as a direct embodiment of the public hearing principle in the digital age).

(2) The key risks of digitalization that threaten transparency are breaches of personal data confidentiality and protection, cybersecurity threats (hacking, falsification of digital evidence), and the exacerbation of the digital divide, leading to procedural injustice.

(3) The primary obstacle to realizing the benefits of digital technologies is a systemic gap in legal regulation, particularly the absence of comprehensive norms in the Russian Code of Criminal Procedure governing the use of AI, blockchain, and big data. Achieving the research objectives requires the implementation of provisions into criminal procedure legislation that establish clear procedures, boundaries of openness, and guarantees for the protection of individual rights in the context of digital transformation.

Subject. Features of legal regulation of the procedure for seizing electronic data storage devices conducted as part of investigative actions in crime investigation, as well as current issues related to the practical implementation of Article 164.1 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code (CPC of the RF) – one of the main “digital” novelties of the CPC of the RF. The purpose of the article is to identify the features of seizing electronic data storage devices as a type of physical evidence, to summarize and analyze the approaches of various courts to implementing the rule on involving a specialist in the procedure for seizing electronic data storage devices, and to interpret Parts 1 and 2 of Article 164.1 of the CPC of the RF in conjunction with Part 4.1 of Article 164 of the CPC of the RF.

Methodology. The paper uses the method of legal modeling, as well as logical, formal legal and other methods. These methods, taken together, made it possible to interpret the normative provisions and theoretical approaches related to the procedure for seizing electronic data storage devices during various investigative actions, and to identify individual shortcomings and contradictions in the legislative regulation of the considered group of legal relations, to formulate conclusions in strict accordance with the rules for operating with concepts, judgments, and inferences. The method of legal modeling made it possible to determine priority measures aimed at improving domestic criminal procedure legislation.

Main results and conclusions. Based on the study of the practice of applying Article 164.1 of the CPC of the RF, it is concluded that during the long period of its operation, the embedded “mechanisms” for overcoming prohibitions on unjustified seizure of electronic data storage devices in relation to business entities have not been eliminated, and controversial issues of the practical implementation of this «digital novelty» have not been resolved, which makes it difficult to implement the guarantee of judicial appeal against actions and decisions in accordance with Article 125 of the CPC of the RF. The authors substantiate the need to establish the concept of an electronic data storage device and the grounds for involving an investigator to involve a specialist in seizing electronic data storage devices and copying information from them, as well as clarifying the grounds for the mandatory involvement of an investigator to involve a specialist in the seizures of electronic data storage devices being carried out and copying information from them.

Subject. Features of legal regulation of the procedure for seizing electronic data storage devices conducted as part of investigative actions in crime investigation, as well as current issues related to the practical implementation of Article 164.1 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code (CPC of the RF) – one of the main “digital” novelties of the CPC of the RF. The purpose of the article is to identify the features of seizing electronic data storage devices as a type of physical evidence, to summarize and analyze the approaches of various courts to implementing the rule on involving a specialist in the procedure for seizing electronic data storage devices, and to interpret Parts 1 and 2 of Article 164.1 of the CPC of the RF in conjunction with Part 4.1 of Article 164 of the CPC of the RF.

Methodology. The paper uses the method of legal modeling, as well as logical, formal legal and other methods. These methods, taken together, made it possible to interpret the normative provisions and theoretical approaches related to the procedure for seizing electronic data storage devices during various investigative actions, and to identify individual shortcomings and contradictions in the legislative regulation of the considered group of legal relations, to formulate conclusions in strict accordance with the rules for operating with concepts, judgments, and inferences. The method of legal modeling made it possible to determine priority measures aimed at improving domestic criminal procedure legislation.

Main results and conclusions. Based on the study of the practice of applying Article 164.1 of the CPC of the RF, it is concluded that during the long period of its operation, the embedded “mechanisms” for overcoming prohibitions on unjustified seizure of electronic data storage devices in relation to business entities have not been eliminated, and controversial issues of the practical implementation of this «digital novelty» have not been resolved, which makes it difficult to implement the guarantee of judicial appeal against actions and decisions in accordance with Article 125 of the CPC of the RF. The authors substantiate the need to establish the concept of an electronic data storage device and the grounds for involving an investigator to involve a specialist in seizing electronic data storage devices and copying information from them, as well as clarifying the grounds for the mandatory involvement of an investigator to involve a specialist in the seizures of electronic data storage devices being carried out and copying information from them.

The subject. In recent years, the concept of “standard of proof” has been attracting increasing attention from Russian researchers of procedural law. However, its interpretation in legal literature is diverse, ranging from detailed explanations to mere references. The standards of proof vary depending on several factors, such as the scope of evidence (which is influenced by the specific nature of the industry or legal institution, the category of the case, the stage of proof, or the individual circumstances), the nature of dispute resolution (whether it is judicial or non-judicial, including pre-trial and arbitration proceedings), the participants in the proof process, and the distribution of the burden of proof between them and the court.

The purpose of the study. To analyze the extent to which the court has freedom to collect and evaluate evidence in Russian arbitration, civil, and criminal proceedings. Methodology. The authors used the method of monitoring the norms of Russian Federal Acts, the method of analyzing, and the method of comparing the analysis results.

The main results. It should be noted that in civil and arbitration proceedings, the court has the right and obligation to: base its research on the information provided by the parties; influence the proof of legally significant circumstances by determining their scope and presenting certain circumstances for discussion by the parties; initiate the collection of evidence by the parties and thus compensate for their lack of evidence-gathering activity; to comprehensively, fully, and objectively examine the evidence in the case by conducting judicial and investigative actions together with the parties. In the criminal process, in terms of the court’s freedom to evaluate evidence: evidence becomes legally valid only if it is sufficient to resolve the criminal case; are recognized as inadmissible and excluded from the list of evidence at any stage of the criminal proceedings, up to the entry of the verdict into force; the legislator does not prohibit, when considering the case on the merits, a repeated appeal to the issue of admissibility of a previously excluded evidence.

Conclusions. In the modern Russian legal system, there is no clear and unambiguous normative regulation of “standards of proof” in relation to different bodies authorized to resolve disputes, as well as their differentiation within individual branches of procedural law. The standard of proof can be interpreted as a legal requirement addressed to the law enforcement officer and participants in the process, who must determine, based on their internal conviction, whether the collected evidence is necessary and sufficient to resolve the dispute, taking into account their authority and responsibilities for protecting private or public interests.

The subject of this research is the system of extraordinary criminal proceedings in the modern criminal process. The relevance of the study is due to the permanent differentiation of the criminal procedural form and the tendency to expand the scope of simplified and complicated criminal proceedings.

The purpose of this work is to determine the possibility of combining various extraordinary judicial proceedings.

The research is based on a comprehensive application of formal-logical, comparative-legal, and statistical methods.

Main results. The specified court proceedings are provided for in Chapters 32.1, 40, 40.1, 41, 42, 50, 51 and 51.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. These include: a special procedure for trial when the accused agrees with the charges; a special procedure for trial in criminal cases where the investigation was conducted in a reduced form; a special procedure for trial when a pre-trial cooperation agreement is reached; proceedings in private prosecution cases; proceedings with the participation of jurors; proceedings in criminal cases involving minors; proceedings on the use of compulsory medical measures; and proceedings on the imposition of a criminal fine. The author analyzes the possibility of combining them, and concludes that they can be combined or compete with each other.

Conclusions. It is possible to combine or compete with extraordinary legal proceedings. At the same time, the article provides a critical assessment of the legal regulation of the combination of certain extraordinary proceedings, which creates enforcement problems, including in the issuance of interim and final court decisions.