Review: This article raises the questions on the improvement of work management in the prosecutorial branches on consideration of complaints of the parties to criminal proceedings against actions (or inaction) and decisions of the investigator and the prosecutor. Analysis is conducted on the existing in the prosecutor’s office procedure of pretrial dispute, which legislative consolidation is associated with usage of the term “superior prosecutor”. The subject of this research is the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, executive documents of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation and prosecutor's offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as scientific literature on the topic at hand. The conclusion is made that the current legislation and the established law enforcement practice assume on the recurrent appeal on the same instance of violation of law within a single prosecutorial branch, and thus do not effectively protect the rights and legitimate interests of the parties involved in the criminal procedure sphere. For this reason, the author makes recommendations on the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation aimed at adjustment of the procedure of consideration of complaints of the parties to criminal proceedings, which would ensure their resolution within the framework of a single prosecutorial branch in a single instance.

Keywords: participant in criminal proceedings, investigator, lower-level prosecutor, prosecutor, higher prosecutor, criminal proceedings, consideration of complaints, consideration of requests, organization of work, prosecutor's office

Review: The subject of this research is the interdisciplinary legal and computer research tools and methods. The authors substantiate the interdisciplinary (legal-computational) methodology for automated analysis and assessment of qualitative changes in legislation and law enforcement practice. Interim results of the research project that are of methodological nature and cover methodological paradigm, principles, means and methods of scientific research are provided. The formulated conclusions represent a summary of heuristic search and computational experiments carried out in the domain field of administrative tort law, as well as comprehension of the process and results of research from both, legal and computer perspectives. Explanation is given to the interdisciplinary paradigm in the indicated methodological area. Leaning on the empirical evidence and observations, the author formulates the three research principles: principle of heterogeneity of domain, principle of discreteness of legal practice, and principle of identity of the model. As the key research tools, the author substantiates and tests in computational experiments the scientific information-analytical system, mathematical and social indicators have been developed, justified and tested in computational experiments. Computer methods (knowledge modeling, natural language processing, machine learning) that ensure automation of identification and usage of indicators mate with the dogmatic method, systemic analysis and expert assessment responsible for legal interpretation of computations.  The legal and computer tools are determined for identification and usage of the principal indicators. In conclusion, the author outlines a number of problems and restrictions determined in the course of the conducted research.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, machine learning, big data, digital state, administrative responsibility, optimization of law, efficiency of law, computer methods, indicators, interdisciplinary study