home Calculators Appointment of a forensic economic examination. The procedure for the appointment of a forensic economic examination

Appointment of a forensic economic examination. The procedure for the appointment of a forensic economic examination

The expert opinion is subject to evaluation by the investigator, interrogating officer, prosecutor, court, person or body considering the case of an administrative offense.

The conclusion for the court and the investigation is not obligatory and is evaluated according to general rules and the requirements for assessing evidence, i.e. the opinion of an expert accountant is equated with other evidence in the case. It is evaluated in the same way as other evidence.

The opinion of an expert is optional for the court and is evaluated by the court according to the rules established for the evaluation of evidence. The disagreement of the court with the conclusion must be motivated in the decision or ruling of the court. The expert opinion is announced at the court session and examined along with other evidence in the case. The rules for evaluating the conclusion of a forensic examination are given in the articles of the Code of Criminal Procedure "Rules for the Evaluation of Evidence" and the Code of Civil Procedure "Evaluation of Evidence".

In accordance with the rules of procedural law, each evidence is subject to assessment in terms of relevance, admissibility, reliability, and all collected evidence in the aggregate - sufficiency for resolving the case. Therefore, the conclusion of an expert in a criminal case should be assessed by the investigating authorities from four positions:

1) relevance in relation to the case under investigation;

2) admissibility in comparison with other evidence;

3) reliability for compliance with reality;

4) sufficiency in terms of resolving the case.

In civil and arbitration procedural legislation, the opinion of an expert accountant is evaluated in a similar way. The court can evaluate it according to its inner conviction, based on a comprehensive, complete, objective and direct examination of the conclusion and the evidence available in the case.

It is possible to designate several principle criteria

estimates of the expert's opinion, which are given in the codes. In the process of evaluating the expert opinion, it is necessary to:

Make sure that it is prepared by an expert institution or a person who is authorized to present a forensic accounting report;

Make sure that it is signed by the person (persons) having the right to affix the document with a signature, contains all other essential details of this type of evidence;

Check the quality of the materials provided to the expert.

Given the procedural requirements, there are several areas for evaluating the opinion of an expert accountant:

1. Compliance with the procedural procedure for the preparation, appointment and conduct of an examination: the expert's opinion must meet the procedural requirements. Its structure and content must comply with the procedural rules for drawing up an opinion. During the examination, all procedural rules must be observed.

2. Compliance of the conclusion with the issues formulated in the ruling (decree) on the appointment of an examination: it is necessary to verify the wording of the questions in the conclusion and the resolution (determination) of law enforcement agencies. The expert must check the identity of the questions.

3. The presence of logic and consistency in the presentation of facts, evidence and conclusions: the expert must follow the sequence of consideration of the case materials, i.e. each question should be answered in order. The conclusions of the expert should be interconnected with the processes of economic activity reflected in accounting. The content of the conclusion should not contradict the reliable facts that are reflected in the primary documents, accounting registers, reporting.

4. Objectivity of the conclusion: the conclusions of the expert must be confirmed by the facts and documents established by him and based on accounting and reporting data. The expert may rely on other information provided to him, if it has legal force, is documented and does not contradict the conclusions of the expert.

5. Conclusions should be confirmed by appropriate comments to regulatory documents on the case under investigation and backed up with references to laws, regulations, orders, etc. The absence of references allows, when evaluating the examination, to doubt the objectivity of the expert's conclusions.

6. Determining the completeness of the expert's conclusion: the conclusion must contain information about the examination of the object of examination from all possible sides. In doing so, a variety of information base or accounting documents. The examiner may apply several traditional verification techniques. The presence of several options for studying the issue will allow you to assess the completeness of the results of the examination.

7. Scientific validity: the expert must rely on special research methods. In this case, the method, technique or procedure that was used during the examination should be indicated. Non-traditional and questionable methods should be avoided. Also, the conclusions can be substantiated by analytical calculations. The value of the conclusion increases with the parallel application of analytical and documentary methods of verification.

8. Concreteness of the conclusion: it should not contain different interpretations of the questions. It is necessary to give an unequivocal answer to the question, supported by evidence. Answers should sound clear, precise, short, specific.

9. Nature of presentation and style: the conclusion must be understandable. If it is unclear, complex terms are used and their interpretation is not given, the expert may be called in for questioning.

The conclusions of an expert accountant may contradict other evidence collected in the case. The discrepancies are due to two reasons: the presence of possible errors in the opinion of an expert accountant; the unreliability of other evidence with the truth of the expert's conclusions. In these cases, the subjects who appointed the examination evaluate the conclusion according to their inner conviction in conjunction with all the available evidence in the case.

The result of evaluating the opinion of an expert accountant may be its recognition:

Complete, scientifically sound and suitable for use in proving in full;

Insufficiently clear or incomplete, requiring additional study of some objects. In this case, an additional examination is appointed;

Unreasonable, questioning its correctness. In this case, a second examination is appointed by a motivated determination or resolution.

The court or the investigator may not agree with the conclusions of the expert and, without appointing a re-examination, decide the case on the basis of other evidence, if they together make it possible to draw a true conclusion about the actual factual circumstances of the case.

Law enforcement agencies are obliged to reflect the results of the assessment of the conclusion in their decision. In doing so, the decision states:

The motives for which the expert's opinion is rejected, and other evidence is accepted as a means of substantiating the conclusions of the court (investigation). Another situation may arise when the expert opinion is the main evidence in the case, and other evidence is not accepted for consideration;

The grounds on which evidence is given preference over the expert's opinion, and vice versa.

The reasoned part of the decision must contain a convincing analysis of the shortcomings of the expert opinion and reasons why it is rejected.

Litigation process planning economic expertise.

The procedural rules provide for the time limits for the consideration of criminal and civil cases.

The definitions and resolutions on the appointment of a forensic accounting expertise, among other tasks, provide for the duration of the expertise, i.e. start date and end date, and submission of an expert accountant's opinion. The head of a state or non-state forensic institution, when issuing an assignment to an expert or a group of experts, adheres to the deadlines established in the resolution or ruling.

In order to fulfill the task of conducting the examination in time and in full, the expert-organizer, who is the head of the group of expert accountants (if the examination is carried out by several experts), or the expert himself draws up a schedule for the forensic accounting examination.

The requirements for drawing up a plan for conducting a forensic accounting examination are not regulated by procedural legislation. The need for planning is due to objective reasons.

Planning by an expert of his work allows:

Comply with expert production deadlines;

Give due attention to all aspects of the case;

Perform work with optimal costs, efficiently and in a timely manner;

Efficiently allocate work among the members of the expert group involved in the review;

Coordinate the work of experts;

Identify events, operations, documents, information that can have a significant impact on the expert's conclusions and the outcome of the case.

The planning of the forensic accounting expert process can be carried out on the basis of the planning principles used in audit practice, but taking into account the requirements of procedural legislation. Such planning is governed by federal rule (standard) No. 3 "Audit planning".

Planning is the initial stage of forensic accounting expertise. On the basis of the schedule, a program of forensic accounting expertise is developed, which can determine the scope, types and sequence of expert procedures necessary to form an objective and reasonable opinion among expert accountants on the organization of accounting of an economic entity.

The examination program is a set of instructions for the examiner performing the examination, as well as a means of monitoring and verifying the proper performance of the work. In the process of developing a program, the expert should take into account the directions of research of issues raised by law enforcement agencies. The study of questions can be independently detailed by the expert, depending on the subject of the examination (for example, the question involves a documentary examination and arithmetic verification of data).

Planning forensic accounting expertise should be carried out by an expert accountant in accordance with general principles conducting an expert study, as well as taking into account the following particular planning requirements:

Complexity - ensuring the interconnectedness and consistency of all stages of the expert study;

Efficiency - linking all stages of planning in terms of time, in terms of the analyzed issues, in terms of the list of objects under study;

Optimality - providing planning variability for choosing the optimal plan, which allows reducing the examination time and optimizing the efficiency of the expert result.

Test suite

Disciplines

Level of professional education: higher professional education first level - master's degree

Direction of training (specialty): 40.04.01 Jurisprudence

Profile « Legal support economic, managerial and

expert activity"

Qualification (degree) of the graduate: master

Form of study: (correspondence)

Tula 2016

A set of tests for the academic discipline "Forensic Economic Expertise" was compiled by Ph.D. Associate Professor of the Department of Forensic Science and Customs Zvezda I.I. and discussed at a meeting of the Department of Forensic Science and Customs of the Institute of Law and Management (minutes No. 1 of the meeting of the department dated August 31, 2016)

Developer(s) of the discipline (module) _______________________

personal signature(s)

*d) accounting;

e) computer-technical.

5. The expert has the right:

7. The accounting document is:

a) a private person;

*b) incompetent;

*c) all the indicated bodies.

11. When is a repeated documentary audit carried out?

a) conclusion;

b) a resolution;

c) description;

*d) an act;

e) collation sheet.

14. Within what time, after receiving the investigator's decision on the appointment of a forensic accounting expertise, should an expert be allocated?

*a) immediately;

b) within 1 day;

c) within 5 days;

d) within 1 month.

*c) all of the above cases;

a) a certificate;

b) resolution;

*c) a motivated message.

21. Is it allowed to consider issues related to the legal qualification and the subjective side of the crime in the expert's opinion?

22. Is participation in criminal proceedings as a specialist a reason for self-withdrawal of an expert?

a) yes, at your discretion;

d) only expert testimony.

28. How long does it take for an audit report carried out at the initiative of the control and audit body, as a result of which facts of an offense in the economic sphere were revealed, to be submitted to a law enforcement agency?

*a) 10 days;

b) after 1 month;

b) formal check;

c) chronological analysis;

G) comparative analysis.

31. What normative act provides for the appointment of a forensic examination by the preliminary investigation bodies?

32. The subject of forensic economic expertise is the phenomena,

33. The main tasks of the forensic economic examination are:

*D) All answers are correct.

34. The objects of the expert's research are:

B) inventory materials

*B) both answers are correct.

35. Research part of the expert's opinion:

36. There are the following grounds for self-withdrawal of an expert:

*D) All answers are correct.

37. The expert has the following rights:

38. The expert is not obliged:

their conclusions

39. The main types of economic accounting are:

*A) management accounting

*B) accounting

B) statistical accounting

40. To protective functions accounting relate:

A) next-forming

*B) protective

*B) preventive

D) distribution

41. Administrative documents include:

*A) order

*B) order

*B) prescription

D) invoice

42. Forged documents include:

*A) counterfeit

B) incorrectly formatted

B) primary

43. Seizure of accounting documents can be carried out by:

*A) internal affairs bodies

B) tax office

D) customs administration

44. For the organization and state of accounting in the enterprise

is responsible:

A) leader

*B) Chief Accountant

45. When identifying theft from the fund wages used in an industrial plant the following documents:

A) pay slips*

B) HR documents

D) material reports

46. What types of forensic examinations are economic:

a) expertise food products

*d) accounting;

e) computer-technical.

47. What types of expertise are related to forensic accounting expertise:

*a) data expertise management accounting;

*b) examination of the fulfillment of tax obligations;

c) examination of managerial decisions.

48.What types of expertise relate to financial and economic expertise:

*a) examination of records on the essence of business transactions in accounting accounts;

b) examination of individual indicators production activities(in particular, economic and labor expertise);

*c) examination of settlement transactions related to changes in the property of the enterprise.

49. What tasks are solved within the framework of forensic accounting expertise:

a) determination of the validity of the calculation of the planned cost per unit of the manufactured product;

*b) identification of facts of misrepresentation of accounting data and determination of their nature;

*c) determination of the degree of influence of the facts of intellectual forgery established by the investigation on financial results enterprise activities.

50. The expert has the right:

a) independently collect materials for expert research;

*b) refuse to give an opinion on issues beyond the scope of special accounting knowledge;

c) give a deliberately false conclusion;

*d) get acquainted with the materials of the case relating to the subject of the examination.

51. The general objects of the expert's research are:

*a) primary and consolidated accounting documents;

b) protocols for the seizure of documents and decisions to attach them to the case;

*c) accounting documents (accounting entries, accumulative statements);

d) acts of documentary audit of the opinion of experts in other fields of knowledge.

52. The accounting document is:

a) any material carrier of data on accounting objects;

b) any material carrier of data on accounting objects;

c) there is no concept of "accounting" document;

*d) a material carrier of data on accounting objects, which allows legal evidence to confirm the right and fact of the transaction.

53. Documents can be classified on the basis of:

a) by purpose, method of coverage of transactions, at the place of compilation;

b) by purpose, structure, place of compilation and by the amount of information;

c) on administrative and acquittal;

*d) by purpose, method of coverage of the operation, structure, place of compilation, method of compilation and structure.

54. Under what circumstances is the participation of an expert in criminal proceedings excluded if:

a) a private person;

*b) incompetent;

*c) participates as a specialist;

*d) if he is in official or other dependence on the parties or their representatives.

55. Which authorities are entitled to conduct non-departmental documentary audits?

a) control and audit departments of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation;

b) public authorities tax service;

*c) all the indicated bodies.

56. When is a repeated documentary audit carried out?

a) in a situation where an inventory has not been carried out;

b) in any cases at the discretion of the body of inquiry, investigator;

*c) in a situation where a low methodological level of the primary audit and the auditor's dishonesty for any reason is established.

57. What document is used to document the results of a documentary audit?

a) conclusion;

b) a resolution;

c) description;

*d) an act;

e) collation sheet.

58. Is the auditor warned about criminal liability for drawing up a knowingly false act?

59. Within what time, after receiving the investigator's decision on the appointment of a forensic accounting expertise, should an expert be allocated?

*a) immediately;

b) within 1 day;

c) within 5 days;

d) within 1 month.

60. In what cases is an expert accountant required to conduct a forensic accounting examination?

a) if he can answer at least one question put to him by the investigator;

*b) only in cases where he can answer all the questions put to him by the investigator.

61. Can an expert accountant apply factual verification methods?

c) only in cases where it is specified in the assignment.

62. What can be grounds for disqualification of an expert in a case?

a) the discovery of his incompetence;

b) finding an expert accountant in official or other dependence on the parties and their representatives;

*c) all of the above cases;

d) his participation in this case as a specialist accountant.

62. What document does an expert draw up when he cannot give an opinion on the questions put to him?

a) a certificate;

b) resolution;

*c) a motivated message.

64. Does the expert have the right to get acquainted with the materials of the criminal case relating to the subject of the examination?

65. Does the suspect, the accused have the right to get acquainted with the decision on the appointment of a forensic examination?

c) at the discretion of the preliminary investigation bodies.

66. Is it allowed to consider issues related to the legal qualification and the subjective side of the crime in the expert's opinion?

67. Is participation in criminal proceedings as a specialist a reason for self-withdrawal of an expert?

68. Does a specialist have the right to ask questions to participants in an investigative action?

a) yes, at your discretion;

*b) yes, but only with the permission of the inquirer, investigator, prosecutor, and the court;

69. When is an additional forensic accounting expertise ordered?

a) if there is a discrepancy between the conclusions of the audit carried out at the request of the investigator (court) and other materials of the case;

b) upon a justified petition of the accused for the appointment of a forensic accounting expertise;

*c) in case of insufficient clarity or incompleteness of the expert's opinion, as well as in the event of new questions arising in relation to the previously investigated circumstances of the criminal case.

70. When is a repeated forensic accounting examination scheduled?

*a) in case of doubts about the validity of the expert's conclusion or the presence of contradictions in the expert's conclusions;

b) if the primary audit was carried out by departmental bodies.

71. Is it allowed to use expert opinion and expert testimony as evidence?

c) only an expert opinion;

d) only expert testimony.

72. Can primary documents be seized by law enforcement officers?

73. How long does it take for an audit report carried out at the initiative of the control and audit body, as a result of which facts of an offense in the economic sphere were revealed, to be submitted to a law enforcement agency?

*a) 10 days;

b) after 1 month;

c) at the discretion of the head of the control and audit department.

74. What techniques are used to check related documents?

*a) cross check, mutual control;

b) formal check;

c) chronological analysis;

d) comparative analysis.

75. What techniques are used when checking a single accounting document?

a) mutual control and chronological analysis;

*b) formal, normative and arithmetic checks;

c) comparative analysis and cross-checking.

76. What normative act provides for the appointment of a forensic examination by the preliminary investigation bodies?

a) federal law"On State Forensic Activities in the Russian Federation";

b) the Federal Law "On Accounting";

*c) the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

77. The subject of forensic economic expertise is the phenomena,

characterized by the following features:

*A) Associated with economic activity

B) Reflected in accounting

C) Determined by the questions posed by the investigator (court)

78. The main tasks of the forensic economic examination are:

A) checking and establishing the presence or absence of shortages, surpluses,

material assets, as well as the amount of damage caused.

B) checking the documentary validity of the costs of inventory items and Money

C) verification and determination of the fact of business transactions, not

reflected in accounting data

*D) All answers are correct.

79. The objects of the expert's research are:

A) primary and consolidated accounting documents

B) inventory materials

*B) both answers are correct.

80. Research part of the expert opinion:

A) contains the grounds for the examination, the circumstances of the case and the initial

data relevant to giving an opinion

*B) contains the methods used in the study of the question posed.

81. There are the following grounds for self-withdrawal of an expert:

A) participation of an expert accountant in this case in a different capacity

B) finding an expert accountant in official or other dependence on

accused, victim, defendant

C) incompetence of an expert accountant

*D) All answers are correct.

82. An expert has the following rights:

*A) get acquainted with the materials of the case

*B) to submit a request for additional materials

*C) appeal in the prescribed manner the actions and decisions of the investigator,

violating the rights and legitimate interests of an expert

D) perform cross-checks at other enterprises.

83. The expert is not obliged:

A) appear when summoned by the investigator to clarify or supplement this

their conclusions

*B) not declare self-withdrawal in cases provided for by law.

84. The main types of economic accounting are:

*A) management accounting

*B) accounting

B) statistical accounting

D) operational and technical accounting

85. Protective functions of accounting include:

A) next-forming

*B) protective

*B) preventive

D) distribution

86. Administrative documents include:

*A) order

*B) order

*B) prescription

D) invoice

87. Forged documents include:

*A) counterfeit

B) incorrectly formatted

B) primary

88. Withdrawal of accounting documents can be carried out by:

*A) internal affairs bodies

B) tax office

B) administrative authorities

D) customs administration

89. For the organization and state of accounting in the enterprise

is responsible:

A) leader

*B) chief accountant

90. When identifying theft from the payroll fund at an industrial enterprise, the following documents are used:

A) pay slips*

B) payroll statements *

B) HR documents

D) material reports

91. What types of forensic examinations are economic:

a) examination of food products

*d) accounting;

e) computer-technical.

92. What types of expertise are related to forensic accounting expertise:

*а) expertise of management accounting data;

*b) examination of the fulfillment of tax obligations;

c) examination of managerial decisions.

93. What types of expertise relate to financial and economic expertise:

*a) examination of records on the essence of business transactions in accounting accounts;

b) examination of individual indicators of production activity (in particular, economic and labor examination);

*c) examination of settlement transactions related to changes in the property of the enterprise.

94. What tasks are solved within the framework of forensic accounting expertise:

a) determination of the validity of the calculation of the planned cost per unit of the manufactured product;

*b) identification of facts of misrepresentation of accounting data and determination of their nature;

*c) determination of the degree of influence of the facts of intellectual forgery established by the investigation on the financial results of the enterprise.

95. The expert has the right:

a) independently collect materials for expert research;

*b) refuse to give an opinion on issues beyond the scope of special accounting knowledge;

c) give a deliberately false conclusion;

*d) get acquainted with the materials of the case relating to the subject of the examination.

96. The general objects of the expert's research are:

*a) primary and consolidated accounting documents;

b) protocols for the seizure of documents and decisions to attach them to the case;

*c) accounting documents (accounting entries, accumulative statements);

d) acts of documentary audit of the opinion of experts in other fields of knowledge.

97. The accounting document is:

a) any material carrier of data on accounting objects;

b) any material carrier of data on accounting objects;

c) there is no concept of "accounting" document;

*d) a material carrier of data on accounting objects, which allows legal evidence to confirm the right and fact of the transaction.

98. Documents can be classified on the basis of:

a) by purpose, method of coverage of transactions, at the place of compilation;

b) by purpose, structure, place of compilation and by the amount of information;

c) on administrative and acquittal;

*d) by purpose, method of coverage of the operation, structure, place of compilation, method of compilation and structure.

99. Under what circumstances is the participation of an expert in criminal proceedings excluded if:

a) a private person;

*b) incompetent;

*c) participates as a specialist;

*d) if he is in official or other dependence on the parties or their representatives.

100. Which authorities are entitled to conduct non-departmental documentary audits?

a) control and audit departments of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation;

Thus, in accordance with the subject of forensic economic examination, its objects in criminal cases include documents that have legal significance for judicial protection of property rights and not corresponding to the actual circumstances entrepreneurial activity in connection with the gratuitous seizure of income from a business entity as a victim of a crime.

Since reliable documents are evidence in civil proceedings, it seems that the specified reliable documents also belong to the objects of forensic economic examination in civil cases.

Following the logic of the subject of an expert study in civil cases, it can be argued that the objects of examination, along with the balance sheet of the organization, include only those primary documents that confirm the losses caused to the plaintiff in connection with the failure to fulfill contractual obligations by the respondent.

As the practice of production of examinations shows, along with the objects of examination are very important other materials of the case containing information related to the subject of the examination. The study of other materials of the case allows the expert to become stronger in the conclusions from the study of his own objects, it is better to delve into the plot of the case, thereby preventing possible mistakes when examining objects. Often "their" objects are not enough to give a conclusion. In this case, the expert examines the source data related to the subject of the examination, contained in other case materials.

Other materials of the case, containing initial data related to the subject of forensic economic examination, include protocols of interrogations with testimonies of the accused, witnesses, victims.

Interrogation protocols contain information about the facts of entrepreneurial activity that are not contained in the objects of research in this criminal case. These, for example, include information about the facts of the sale (realization) of goods (products, works, services), settlements of the organization under study with suppliers or other third-party organizations, facts of natural product exchange (trade exchange operations), forms of accounting adopted in the organization and the procedure for document flow, compliance of the information of cash and other areas of accounting of the organization under study with primary documents, compliance of the accrued depreciation of the cost of fixed production assets, their payback periods and depreciation rates, and others.

The expert does not duplicate the testimony, but selects from the testimony the initial data related to the subject of the examination, examines them and draws conclusions regarding the subject of the examination. Thus, it is very important to select from the testimonies of witnesses only information about the facts of economic transactions and abstract from the definitions of the nature of civil law transactions between business entities. Otherwise, you can make an incorrect conclusion about the damage caused.

For example, in one criminal case, the initial data for giving an opinion on the amount of damage caused to the state was contained only in the protocols of interrogations of witnesses. At the same time, the witnesses use terms, including various written forms contracts of a civil law nature, for testimony about the same transaction, including “marketing services”, “intermediary operations”, “collection of receivables” and others. Only abstraction from civil law characteristics allowed the expert to conclude that commercial organization specific services were provided to enforce the repayment of accounts payable in favor of the supplier by consumers for the supplied electricity. The income from rendering these services amounted to the difference between the cost of consumer goods sold as payment for electricity and the cost of these goods transferred by a commercial organization to a creditor - an electricity supplier.

In general, it is possible to outline the rules that forensic experts should use to work with the testimony of witnesses:

extracting from the protocols of interrogations information about the facts of the movement of goods and the oncoming movement of money;
mandatory abstraction (neglect) from the civil law form of relationships with other business entities;
a clear definition of a specific subject of sales for a given business entity ( specific view products, goods, works or services);
determination of income from the sale of this item of sale according to the available information and in accordance with the objective balance of the relationship between sellers and buyers;
not taking into account the private opinion of the witness regarding information about the facts instead of the facts of the movement of goods and the movement of money.

The expert's conclusions from the examination of the testimonies of witnesses may be true, provided that the investigator or the court recognizes the initial data presented to the expert as correct.

The objects of research and other case materials examined by an expert economist include copies, photocopies, second and third copies of documents relevant to the case and attached to the case as evidence. These documents are examined subject to verification of their probative value by means of a forensic economic examination or other investigative actions.

Thus, Russian civil procedural law does not contain restrictions on the use of derivative evidence. However, the law emphasizes that written evidence, as a rule, is presented in the original. If a copy of the document is submitted, the court may, if necessary, require the submission of the original.

With the destruction of original original evidence, establishing the truth on the basis of derivatives appears as a necessity. The law obliges to strive for obtaining initial evidence in case of doubts about the correctness of derivatives; when examining evidence, it is necessary to check the conditions for the formation of derivative evidence and the circumstances affecting their reliability.

The judge (court) cannot refuse to add evidence to the case because they are not primary sources. The reliability of both initial and derivative evidence is assessed by the court as a result of comparing both with all the materials of the case.

1.3. Production of forensic economic examinations

The procedure for the appointment of a forensic economic examination

The grounds for the production of a forensic economic examination are the decision of the court, the decision of the judge, the person conducting the inquiry, the investigator or the prosecutor. Judicial examination is considered appointed from the date of issuance of the relevant decision or ruling.

Examination at the stage of preliminary investigation may be appointed by both the body of inquiry and the investigator. However, after the initiation of a case, the bodies of inquiry are obliged to carry out only urgent investigative actions to identify and fix the traces of the crime, after which they transfer the case to the investigator. Therefore, in the vast majority of cases, it is the investigator who appoints the forensic economic examination. On the investigator in accordance with Art. 69 of the Code of Criminal Procedure imposes the obligation to collect evidence, on the basis of which the presence or absence of a socially dangerous act, the guilt of the person who committed this act, and other circumstances are established. These data are established by the testimony of a witness, victim, suspect, accused, expert opinion, material evidence, protocols of investigative and judicial actions and other documents.

According to Art. 69 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an expert opinion is evidence, and an examination is a procedural action to obtain it. Acts, certificates, conclusions in the case on the results of a departmental study of any circumstance, referred to as an examination (for example, on a shortage of goods and materials, etc.), even though they were received at the request of the investigating authorities or the court, but do not meet the requirements of the rules for conducting judicial - economic expertise, cannot be considered as an expert opinion and serve as a basis for refusing to conduct a forensic examination.

The investigator may appoint an expert examination if special knowledge in science, technology, art or craft is required during the preliminary investigation, and if there is a need for a more competent analysis and interpretation of the collected factual data, a description of the course of certain processes related to cases that have already been previously audited (Article 78 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

The most significant grounds for judicial appointment. accounting expertise are:

the need to study issues that require the use of special knowledge of an expert economist;
poor-quality conduct of the audit, expressed in the presence of contradictions between the act of audit and other materials of the case, contradictions in the conclusions of the auditors during the initial, repeated or additional audits;
a substantiated petition of the accused for the appointment of a forensic economic examination;
opinion of experts of other specialties on the need for a forensic economic examination.

The appointment of a forensic economic examination in accordance with Art. 79 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not mandatory and is at the discretion of the investigator. In addition, the investigator has the right to suspend or terminate the examination on his own initiative or on the basis of statements by the participants in the process (including the expert) at any stage of its production. These functions can also be performed by the heads of investigative units and prosecutors supervising the investigation.

After making a decision to conduct an examination, the investigator evaluates the materials of the case from the point of view of sufficiency and completeness and collects additional data for the examination, without which it is impossible to conduct it. The collected material is analyzed by the investigator and only after that a decision is made on the appointment of a forensic economic examination, which lists the issues to be resolved by the expert. Investigator, court should not allow staging before an expert legal issues that are not within his competence (for example, whether there was a theft, a shortage, who is guilty of embezzlement, etc.). The materials required by the expert economist for each specific case are determined by the investigator. However, the submission of additional materials may be carried out after the appointment of an examination, if the expert so requests.

Having recognized the materials collected for the examination as sufficient, the investigator appoints an examination.

The procedural act that implements this decision is the decision of the investigator on the appointment of an examination. The investigator, the court is not entitled to replace the decision, ruling on the appointment of an examination with other documents not provided for by law (covering letter, list of questions to the expert, etc.).

The resolution in its content consists of an introductory-descriptive and resolutive part.

The first of them must contain the following mandatory details: time and place of drawing up the resolution; class rank or military rank of the investigator, his last name; the name of the investigating authority; when appointing a forensic economic examination by the court, the ruling shall indicate the name of the court, the names of the judge and assessors; case number; indicate the place and date of the decision.

The operative part announces the decision of the investigator to appoint an examination, the name of the expert or the name of the institution in which the examination is to be carried out, sets out the questions posed to the expert for resolution during the study, and describes the materials provided to the expert. The list of materials indicates: objects of study; samples for comparison; investigative materials, the knowledge of which is necessary for the expert. The location of documents and objects is also indicated.

Methods for the production of expertise are determined, as a rule, by the expert. However, the investigator is entitled, based on the circumstances of the case, to indicate in the decision the need for a certain method of investigation (for example, a cross-check of documents).

The preliminary investigation must be completed in accordance with Art. 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure no later than within two months. Therefore, if the volume expert work is large, then in order to speed up the examination, at the initiative of the investigator or the head of the expert institution, several experts of the same specialty are involved in the examination.

The appointment of a forensic examination by the court is a complex process, which is the result of the implementation of both the initiative of the persons participating in the case and the powers of the court.

When appointing an expert examination by the court, a complex of procedural relations is formed: between the court and each of the persons participating in the case; between the court and the expert. These relations differ in terms of origin, content, procedural significance. Relations between the court and each of the persons participating in the case arise regarding a petition for the appointment of an examination, for the appointment of a specific expert, for the removal of an expert, for the formation of a range of issues.

These procedural relations are mediated in the petitions of interested parties and court rulings on their satisfaction or rejection and are characteristic of the very process of appointing a forensic examination; they seem to anticipate the appointment.

The result of actions to appoint an examination is reflected in a special procedural act - decision of the court on the appointment of a forensic examination. It is this that brings to life the system of relations between the court and the expert. Therefore, its structure should be considered in more detail.

The court ruling on the appointment of an expert examination (as well as in the decision of the investigator) in criminal cases must indicate the specific grounds for the appointment of an expert examination, the issues that need to be resolved, the materials and circumstances of the case to be investigated. In the event that an examination was carried out at the stage of the preliminary investigation of the case, the court has the right to put before the expert questions similar to those that he resolved on the instructions of the investigator, and to determine the same range of materials for examination. But from this, the examination on behalf of the court does not become repeated. The principle of direct investigation of evidence in a case means that the court is not bound and not limited by the materials of the preliminary investigation. He independently appoints and conducts examinations provided for by law - primary, additional, repeated - and can interrogate an expert (in accordance with Article 289 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

The peculiarities of appointing an expert examination in a court session are due to the fact that the accuser, defense counsel, defendant, victim, civil plaintiff, civil defendant and their representatives take part in formulating questions, determining the scope of the circumstances under investigation; on all questions put to the expert, the opinion of the participants in the trial, the conclusion of the prosecutor are heard. What questions should be put to the permission of the expert, the court ultimately establishes, including them in its definition or supplementing them with the previously issued one.

The Code of Civil Procedure, unlike the Code of Criminal Procedure (Article 184), does not contain clear rules on this matter. However judicial practice and doctrine developed some General requirements and rules for drafting this definition. The ruling on the appointment of an examination must contain all the details inherent in a judicial ruling and listed in Art. 224 Code of Civil Procedure.

The descriptive part should be formulated in such a way that it is clear from it why the need for this examination arose, for establishing by the court what legally significant circumstance its results may be suitable, what special purpose this study.

Given the need to strengthen procedural guarantees of the rights of the parties when appointing an expert examination, the operative part should be supplemented with an indication that the parties are familiar with the ruling on the appointment of an expert examination.

The ruling on the appointment of an expert examination does not specify the procedure and terms for appealing, since the law does not provide for such a possibility. An interested person who does not agree with the ruling on the appointment of an expert examination (for example, with the range of questions asked to the expert or with the very fact of the appointment of an expert examination) cannot appeal such a ruling separately from the appeal of the court decision.

If a higher court recognizes the appointment of an expert examination as unlawful or unreasonable and cancels the decision on the appointment of an expert examination, then, accordingly, all legal consequences of such a decision are “annulled”. For example, if the court has already received an expert’s opinion (in the case when the ruling is appealed without suspension of the examination), then the cancellation by the higher court of the decision on the appointment of the examination makes it impossible for the court of first instance to use the expert’s opinion as evidence.

So, when appointing an examination at the stage of preparing a case for trial, one must pay attention to the deadlines established by Art. 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure (the preparation of the case is carried out within a seven-day period). If the production of an expert examination requires more time, then, according to a reasoned decision of the judge, the total time for preparing the case may be extended up to 20 days; however, this power of a judge is provided by law for exceptional cases (part 1 of article 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure).

Since a forensic examination is most often carried out outside the court (i.e., not in the courtroom), when it is appointed at the trial stage, it becomes necessary to provide the expert with time for a special study. Therefore, the Code of Civil Procedure provides for the right of the court to suspend the proceedings in the event of an expert examination (clause 5, article 215 of the Code of Civil Procedure). The decision to suspend proceedings is issued by the court at the request of the interested persons or on its own initiative.

The need for a commission or comprehensive examination is indicated in the resolution (determination) on the appointment of an examination. The head of the expert institution has the right to give instructions to conduct a commission or comprehensive examination on his own initiative or on the initiative of an expert. An expert conducting an examination outside an expert institution, having come to the conclusion that a commission or complex examination is necessary, raises a question about this before the investigator (court) in the manner prescribed by the procedural law.

Production of expertise in a forensic institution

Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 6, 1994 No. 1133 “On forensic institutions of the system of the Ministry of Justice Russian Federation” VNIISE of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation was transformed into the Russian Federal Center for Forensic Examination, and the central research laboratories and research laboratories for forensic examination - respectively central laboratories and the laboratory of forensic examination of the Ministry of Justice of Russia. The Russian Federal Center for Forensic Examinations provides methodological guidance for forensic examinations; on the ground, this work is carried out by forensic examination laboratories organizationally subordinate to the city (regional) departments of justice of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. AT federal center in accordance with the profile of research work, research laboratories were organized, including the laboratory of forensic economic examinations. The production of forensic economic examinations in institutions of the system of the Ministry of Justice of Russia is carried out on the basis of the “Instructions on the production of forensic examinations in expert institutions of the system of the Ministry of Justice of the USSR” approved on June 9, 1987.

The head of the expert institution, having received the investigator's decision on the examination, is obliged to entrust its production to one or several experts. According to Art. 78 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the questions posed to the expert and his conclusion cannot go beyond the limits of the latter's special knowledge. In addition, the head of the expert institution checks the compliance of the task with the requirements of the law and draws up the examination in the form of a task (Appendix 3).

The task is drawn up in two copies and issued against receipt to an expert economist. The first copy of the task is transferred to the body that appointed the examination. On the back of this copy, the expert-economist signs a warning about liability for refusing to give an opinion, for giving a deliberately false conclusion and about not disclosing the data of the preliminary investigation or inquiry without the permission of the prosecutor, investigator or the person conducting the inquiry. The second copy of the task remains in the institution of forensic examination.

Based on the instructions of the investigator, the head of the expert institution explains to the experts their rights and obligations, they are warned about the responsibility for refusing or evading to give an opinion and for giving a knowingly false opinion.

In accordance with Art. 189 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if an examination is carried out outside an expert institution, the investigator, after issuing a decision on the appointment of an examination, calls the person who is entrusted with the examination, ascertains his identity, specialty and competence, establishes the relationship of the expert to the accused, suspect and victim, and also checks whether whether there are grounds for disqualifying an expert.

The investigator hands the expert a decision on the appointment of an examination, explains to the expert the rights and obligations under Art. 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and warns him of liability for refusal or evasion to give an opinion or for giving a knowingly false opinion. The investigator makes a note about the fulfillment of these actions in the decision on the appointment of an examination, which is certified by the signature of the expert.

In the absence of petitions or after their resolution and in accordance with the established procedure, the expert is provided with necessary materials business, and he proceeds to investigate. The volume of materials provided to the expert, the direction of the investigation is determined by the investigator. He may, on his own initiative, grant to the expert Additional materials, put new additional questions before the expert and exclude previously posed ones.

At the same time, it is recommended to avoid familiarizing the experts with materials that negatively characterize the personality of the accused, as well as other circumstances that are not directly related to the subject of the examination. The expert should also not make assumptions that may not be confirmed in the course of the study, but affect the decisions of the investigator until he receives the conclusion of the examination.

The expert may work with the case materials in the premises provided to him by the investigator. When conducting an examination in an expert institution, the expert works with documents at his workplace. With the permission of the investigator, it is allowed to conduct part of the research in organizations related to the circumstances under study.

The head of the expert institution within five days must report violations in the preparation of materials submitted for examination to the body that appointed it. If this body does not take the necessary measures to eliminate the shortcomings, the head of the expert institution has the right to return the materials without execution, along with a message about the impossibility of giving an opinion.

According to current Instruction the deadlines for the production of expert examinations are established by the head of the expert institution ( structural unit) within 20 days after the preliminary acquaintance of the expert with the case materials. Preliminary acquaintance should last no more than five days. If the examination cannot be carried out within 20 days, the head of the expert institution informs the person (body) that appointed the examination, and sets an additional period in agreement with him.

The head of the expert institution is obliged to control the quality and timing of the examination. Upon completion of the examination, the head of the expert institution checks the validity of the conclusions, the completeness of the study, the correctness of the conclusion and sends the materials to the body that appointed the examination. The conclusion of the examination is submitted to the investigator in a printed form and the number of copies agreed in advance. In accordance with Art. 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the investigator, having received the expert’s opinion (or his message about the impossibility of giving an opinion), is obliged to present it for familiarization to the accused, who has the right to give his explanations and raise objections on the merits of the opinion, as well as to petition for the appointment of an additional or repeated examination.

The most important articles regulating the appointment and conduct of an additional or repeated examination are: Art. 68 APC, Art. 81, 194 and 290 CPC, Art. 77 and 181 Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 95 NK.

Disagreement with the conclusion of the expert-economist of the person conducting the inquiry, the investigator, the prosecutor and the court must be motivated and reflected in the decision or resolution.

Appointment of an additional or repeated examination in case of disagreement of the participants in the process with the conclusions of an expert economist is not mandatory. When appointing them, one should take into account the presence of other evidence in the case, as well as the practical possibility of conducting a secondary examination,

The resolution on the appointment of an additional or repeated expert examination must contain, in addition to the data provided for primary expert examinations, also a statement of the specific grounds on which it turned out to be necessary. The most important of them include: who and on what issues previously made an examination and what conclusions he came to; what additional questions need to be raised for resolution by the expert; what circumstances remain unclear require clarification or verification.

The appointment of an additional or repeated forensic economic examination is formalized by an appropriate ruling (decree), similar in structure to the ruling on the appointment of a primary examination, which is issued in the deliberation room.

The main feature of the decisions on the appointment of additional and repeated examinations is that they set out in detail the reasons that necessitated the appointment and conduct of the latter. It is specified in detail what is the ambiguity or incompleteness of the conclusion of the primary examination, as a result of which circumstances there were additional questions put to the expert for consideration, and there were doubts about the correctness of the previous conclusion of the expert.

The conclusions of primary expert examinations with all appendices to them shall be attached to the resolution on the appointment of an additional or repeated expert examination. The decision to appoint an additional or repeated examination is announced to the accused, and his rights are explained.

If, due to newly discovered circumstances of the case, it becomes necessary to study new materials and objects or the initial data of the study change, then a new examination may be appointed instead of additional or repeated examinations. It is allowed to entrust its implementation to the same expert-economist.

The results of a new expert study are evaluated in interdependence with the results of the previous ones. For example, the investigator may agree with the conclusions of a new (repeated or additional) examination, while the court establishes their groundlessness and uses the original conclusion on the issue under consideration when passing a sentence. That is, the investigator and the court evaluate these conclusions on the merits.

An additional examination is carried out in case of insufficient clarity or incompleteness of the expert's opinion. Its implementation is entrusted to the same or another expert. Insufficiently complete is recognized a conclusion based on the study of not all the documents submitted to the expert or not containing the expert's exhaustive answers to the questions posed.

The definition (decree) stipulates which objects are additionally sent for expert examination, in addition to the materials that were the subject of the first examination.

The investigator, court and arbitration appoint additional forensic economic expertise, mainly when:

new circumstances arise (for example, the emergence of new documents and testimonies that were not the objects of examination of the examination) in the case under investigation, which cannot be resolved without additional examination;
in the course of the proceedings, new issues of significant importance for the present case have arisen;
it is necessary to satisfy the motivated demand of the accused or the plaintiff for the appointment of an additional examination;
the initial conclusion was not complete enough.

In case of disagreement with the conclusion of the expert, the investigator or the court, at the request of the person participating in the case, may appoint re-examination. The issue of a repeated expert examination may be raised by the same persons as the additional expert examination - the investigator, the court, the accused and other participants in the process.

The peculiarity of the repeated forensic economic examination is that the resolution on the appointment of a repeated examination indicates that it must be entrusted to another expert or another group of experts.

When performing a re-examination, along with the questions that were the subject of the primary examination, it is advisable to raise questions about the correctness (scientific validity and applicability in this case) of a particular research method; on the possibility of obtaining, with the help of the methods and means used during the initial examination, the data that are recorded in the conclusion.

The main reasons for the appointment of repeated forensic economic examinations include the following:

violation of the procedural rules for conducting an examination;
violation of the rights of the accused in the appointment and conduct of the examination;
the revealed incompetence of the expert in this matter and the groundlessness of his conclusion;
the presence of contradictions in the conclusions of several experts who conducted research on one case, which could not be resolved during the investigation;
possible interest of the expert in the outcome of the case;
discrepancy and contradiction of the initial data and conclusions on them;
establishing new data that may affect the expert's conclusions.

Commission forensic examination is carried out by several, but not less than two experts of the same or different specialties. The commission nature of a forensic examination is determined by the body or person who appointed it, or by the head of the forensic expert institution. The organization and production of a commission forensic examination are assigned to the head of a forensic institution or to the heads of several forensic institutions. The Commission of Experts will agree on the goals, sequence and scope of the upcoming studies, based on the need to address the issues raised before it.

As part of the commission of experts, which is entrusted with the production of a forensic examination, each expert independently and independently conducts research, evaluates the results obtained by him personally and by other experts, and formulates conclusions on the issues raised within the limits of his special knowledge. One of the experts of the said commission may act as an expert-organizer; his procedural functions do not differ from those of other experts.

In the production of a commission forensic examination by experts of one specialty, each of them conducts research in full and they jointly analyze the results. Having come to a common opinion, the experts draw up and sign a joint opinion or a statement on the impossibility of giving an opinion. In case of disagreement between the experts, each of them gives a separate opinion on the issues that caused the disagreement.

In the production of a commission forensic examination by experts of different specialties (comprehensive examination), each of them conducts research within the limits of his special knowledge. In the opinion of the experts participating in the production of a comprehensive examination, it is indicated what research and to what extent each expert conducted, what facts he established and what conclusions he came to. Each expert participating in the production of a comprehensive examination shall sign that part of the conclusion that contains a description of the studies carried out by him, and shall be responsible for them. The general conclusion is made by experts who are competent in evaluating the results obtained and formulating this conclusion. If the general conclusion is based on the facts established by one or more experts, this should be indicated in the opinion. In case of disagreement between the experts, each of them gives a separate opinion on the issues that caused the disagreement.

The statements of the accused on the conclusions of the examination must be verified by interrogation of an expert in order to clarify and (or) supplement the conclusion given by him, perform other investigative actions, analyze and evaluate the reliability of the expert study. The decision based on the results of familiarization of the accused with the expert's conclusion is made by the investigator.

According to Art. 192 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the investigator has the right to interrogate the expert in order to clarify or supplement the conclusion given by him, and the expert has the right to state his answers in writing.

After reading, the expert certifies with his signature (on each page) the correctness of recording all the answers, and at the end of the protocol he personally indicates the method of studying the protocol (“read in person”, “announced by the investigator”) and fixes the correctness of the entries made in it. The protocol is also signed by the investigator.

During the production of a forensic examination in a forensic expert institution, those participants in the process who are granted such a right by the procedural legislation of the Russian Federation may be present.

The participants in the process present during the production of a forensic examination are not entitled to interfere in the course of the research, but may give explanations and ask questions to the expert related to the subject of the forensic examination.

When drawing up an opinion by an expert, as well as at the stage of a meeting of experts and formulating conclusions, if a forensic examination is carried out by a commission of experts, the presence of participants in the process is not allowed.

If a participant in the proceeding present during the conduct of the forensic examination interferes with the expert, the latter has the right to suspend the examination and petition the body or person that appointed the forensic examination to cancel the permission for the specified participant in the proceeding to be present during the conduct of the forensic examination.

The head of the forensic expert institution, after receiving a decision or ruling on the appointment of an examination, performs the procedural functions provided for by law to organize the production of a forensic examination and to ensure the participation of a forensic expert at the stage of inquiry, preliminary investigation, in a court session.

The head of a forensic expert institution is obliged to:

upon receipt of a resolution or ruling on the appointment of an examination, entrust its production to a specific person or a commission of specialists from among the employees of the institution with special knowledge to the extent required to answer the questions posed to the expert (experts);
explain to the expert or each member of the expert commission the duties and rights of the forensic expert;
warn the expert (experts) about criminal liability for giving a knowingly false opinion, about which he takes away a signature from him (them), which, together with the expert's opinion, is sent to the investigator;
determine the term for the production of an examination in the manner prescribed by the procedural legislation and by-laws regulations, and monitor compliance with it;
at the end of the expert study, send the expert's opinion, objects of study and case materials to the body or person that appointed the examination.
before sending the expert opinion to the body or person that appointed the examination, check the completeness of the answers to the questions posed, the correctness of the conclusion, the safety of the objects of study and case materials.

The head of the forensic expert institution is obliged to provide the conditions necessary for conducting research:

availability of equipment, instruments, materials and means of information support;
compliance with safety regulations and industrial sanitation;
the safety of the presented objects of research and case materials.

The head of a forensic institution has the right to:

return without execution the decision or ruling on the appointment of a forensic examination and the objects and materials of the case submitted for its production, if the institution does not have the appropriate specialists or the necessary material and technical base or special conditions for the production of research;
petition the body or the person who appointed the examination to include in the composition of the expert commission persons who do not work in this institution, if their special knowledge is necessary to give an opinion; the missing specialists included in the commission are personally indicated in the resolution or ruling on the appointment of an examination;
send a copy of the resolution or ruling on the appointment of an examination to the heads of all institutions (divisions), whose forces and means ensure the production of expert studies necessary to resolve the issues raised. The organization of such examinations is carried out by the heads of a number of expert institutions in agreement with each other.

The head of a forensic expert institution is not entitled to:

to demand, without a decision or determination of the body or person that appointed the examination, the objects or materials of the case necessary for the production of the examination;
independently involve in the production of expertise of persons who do not work in this institution;
give the expert instructions that predetermine the course of the study and the content of the conclusions on the examination.

The head of the forensic expert institution has the right to demand from the body or person that appointed the forensic examination, reimbursement of expenses related to:

compensation for storage transport organization research objects submitted for forensic examination, with the exception of fines for late receipt by this institution;
transportation of objects after their examination, with the exception of postage;
storage of objects of research in a forensic institution after the completion of a forensic examination in excess of the time limits established by regulatory legal acts of federal executive bodies;
liquidation of the consequences of explosions, fires and other extreme situations resulting from the receipt of objects in this institution heightened danger, if the body or person that appointed the forensic examination did not inform about the special rules for handling the specified objects or they were improperly packed.

The procedure for the appointment and conduct of accounting expertise by tax authorities is regulated by Art. 95 NK. The main differences between the organization of its conduct and the organization of an examination at the request of the investigation, the court and the prosecutor's office are as follows:

experts are involved only in field tax audits;
the results of the examination (or a message about the impossibility to give an opinion) are attached to the acts of field tax audits;
Narrow, purely special accounting issues are put for expert consideration, since tax officials, by virtue of their competence, must have professional knowledge in the field of accounting and solve the vast majority of these issues on their own;
according to paragraph 2 of Art. 95 of the Tax Code, the involvement of an expert in cooperation is carried out on a contractual basis by concluding a civil law contract for the provision of services between an expert or an expert institution and a tax authority;
the expert's refusal to conclude an agreement with the tax authority (due to the principle of freedom of its conclusion) cannot serve as a basis for holding the expert liable for refusing to conduct an examination;
examination is appointed by resolution official tax authority carrying out a tax audit;
a protocol is drawn up on familiarizing the expert with the resolution on the appointment of an expert examination and explaining to him his rights.

The Federal Tax Police Service of the Russian Federation, in accordance with clause 8 of the Regulations on it, conducts forensic and forensic examinations related to the study of documents to solve the tasks assigned to it (identification, prevention and suppression of tax crimes and offenses, etc.).

The current Code of Criminal Procedure does not regulate procedure for appointing and conducting an examination in court. Within the meaning of Art. 288 Code of Criminal Procedure and Resolutions of the Plenum Supreme Court USSR dated March 16, 1971 No. 1 “On forensics in criminal cases" we are talking on summoning and participation in the court session of the expert who gave the opinion at the preliminary investigation. Issuance of a ruling on the appointment of an examination Art. 288 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide. Often the court, having called an expert to a court session, puts to him the questions that arose in the trial of the case. However, in strict accordance with Art.Article. 261 and 290 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, art. 74, 223 and 224 Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 45, 66, 140 of the APC, if it is necessary to conduct an examination in a case, the court must in all cases issue a ruling on the appointment of an examination.

Examination at the court session consists of the following main stages:

study by an expert accountant of evidence relating to the subject of expertise;
setting before the expert by the participants of the process questions within his competence;
preparation by the expert of answers to the questions put to him;
drawing up a conclusion and coordinating it with other experts;
announcement of the expert's opinion at the court session;
interrogation of an expert to supplement or clarify his conclusion.

AT modern conditions in connection with the development of the financial and economic sphere, the volume of disputes on economic issues between economic entities is increasing. Moreover, there is an increase not only in the number, but also in the variety of contentious issues considered in court. This process is closely interconnected with the analysis of information about business transactions reflected in accounting and reporting documents. Such information can be obtained during the forensic economic examination. Forensic economic examinations are among the most common in civil proceedings, although their production is organized so far only in some state forensic institutions.

Forensic economic examinations are procedural actions carried out in accordance with the procedure established by law, based on a specialized study of economic activity on the basis of financial and economic documentation, which are carried out using special knowledge in the field of economic science in order to identify actual data on the performance of business transactions.

The main purpose of forensic economic examinations is to assist the judiciary in the study and interpretation economic indicators, identifying their intentional and unintentional distortions.

Subject forensic economic examinations are factual data on the performance of business transactions, the study and evaluation of which require special knowledge in the field of economics, accounting, finance, necessary to resolve the case.

If we specify the subject of forensic economic examinations in civil cases and arbitration disputes, then they are actual data (circumstances of the case) that allow, using special knowledge, to establish violations of the law (civil, tax, financial, labor, etc.), which are the causes of disputes between the parties .

Objects economic expertise are primary and reporting documents that reflect the economic transactions performed and contain information on the availability and movement of material and cash. Such documents are:

- agreements between business entities;
- inventory and collation sheets and other inventory materials;
- primary accounting documents;
- accounting registers of accounting (statements, magazines-orders, turnover balance sheets, account cards, etc.);
- financial statements;
- other materials necessary for the production of a forensic economic examination (materials of conducted audits, etc.).

The above documents reflect the business processes of the organization and have evidentiary value when considering a case in court. During the consideration of arbitration and civil cases on economic disputes, it is necessary to conduct an examination of accounting documentation.

As evidence in arbitration and civil proceedings, only an expert opinion is accepted (and not, for example, an audit report, since the auditor is not a participant in procedural legal relations).

The production of forensic economic examinations is regulated by procedural legislation and the Law on Forensic Expert Activities. In addition, an expert economist relies in his research on the norms of codes, other laws and regulations.

The grounds for the appointment of a forensic economic examination are:

- the need to answer questions using special knowledge in the field of economics;
- contradiction between the materials of the case;
- the petition of the participants in the process for the appointment of a forensic economic examination;
- the conclusion of experts of other specialties on the need for a forensic economic examination.

Modern forensic economic expertise has ample opportunities. With its help, for example:

- establishing compliance of operations with regulatory documents;
- identification of actually completed transactions;
- determination of the value of shares and other elements of the business;
- determination of the completeness of tax payment to the budgets of all levels, etc.

The methodological base of forensic economic examinations is a set of methodological techniques used in the expert study of business transactions reflected in accounting and evaluation financial activities organizations. In the production of forensic economic examinations, there are no typical situations, and the questions of the court depend on the characteristics of the situation under consideration. This causes the absence of a unified methodology for forensic economic examinations.

When conducting forensic economic examinations, as a rule, the following methods are used:

Synthesis is a method of studying an object in its integrity, unity and interconnection of its parts. In financial and economic control, synthesis can be associated with analysis. It allows you to connect objects dissected in the process of analysis, establish their connection and cognize the subject as a whole.

Induction is a research technique, which is a conclusion from particular factors to general conclusions, i.e. a conclusion about the state of the object is made on the basis of a study of its individual aspects, for example, an examination of documents reflecting the organization's debt is carried out initially according to analytical accounting data, and then according to synthetic accounting data.

Deduction - the study of the state of the object as a whole based on logical reasoning, drawing conclusions about its constituent elements, i.e. reasoning from the general to the particular.

Concretization - the study of objects in all their versatility, diversity.

System analysis - the study of the object of study as a set of elements that form a system, i.e. the ability to assess the behavior of an object as a system with all the factors influencing its functioning.

Economic analysis is a system of methods for disclosing and determining the cause-and-effect relationships that led to conflict situation in business transactions, which as a result became the object of investigation by law enforcement agencies.

The economic-mathematical method is used to determine the intensity of the influence of factors on the results of financial and economic activities in order to optimize the functioning of the organization.

Verification of arithmetic calculations (recalculation) is a verification of the accuracy of arithmetic calculations in primary documents and accounting records or the performance of independent calculations by an expert.

Verification of documents (inspection): documentary information can be internal, external, external and internal at the same time. Documents prepared and processed within an economic entity are internal. External documents are prepared and sent to the expert economist by third parties. Verification of documents consists in the fact that an expert economist must be convinced of the reliability and good quality of a certain document. To do this, certain records in accounting and the primary document are controlled, which confirm the reality and expediency of the operation, for example, checking documents for formal signs(conformity unified form, the availability of the necessary details) and on the merits of the reflected operations (their expediency and legality).

Tracking is a procedure during which an expert economist checks some primary documents, the reflection of their data in the registers of synthetic and analytical accounting, the compliance of the standard correspondence of accounts with the chart of accounts and accounting regulations.

A cross check is a check of documents from the counterparty of the audited organization.

In conclusion, the expert economist answers the questions posed by the court on the compliance of the organization of the accounting system with regulations, violations of legislation (civil and tax), on the fulfillment of contractual obligations, etc.

It should be noted that conclusions about intentional actions (distortions), misuse, etc., are not allowed in the opinion, i.e. only a statement of certain facts is possible, but not an assessment of the actions of specific persons, which is the prerogative of the court.

When conducting economic expertise, indicators are used in three measurements: 1) natural; 2) cost; 3) labor.

Currently, forensic economic expertise is divided into two main types: forensic accounting and forensic financial and economic expertise1. Each of the types of economic expertise is divided into types depending on the nature of the economic information being studied. Types of economic expertise, in turn, are divided into subcuts and depending on the specifics of the objects under study.

In modern economic conditions, any business transaction is a symbiosis of finance, accounting and other economic phenomena. This determines the relationship between forensic accounting and forensic financial and economic expertise. Based on this, in some cases it is necessary to conduct comprehensive examinations, when the expert has a range of issues that require the use of a wide range of economic knowledge (for example, the valuation of shares and their reflection in the accounting of the enterprise). In this case, the solution of the issue is impossible without the simultaneous joint participation of specialists in various fields of knowledge in formulating one general conclusion.

Appointment of a forensic economic examination. The procedure for the appointment of a forensic economic examination

Similar Documents