Problems of implementation of the principle of optimal workload of an investigator’

Syromiatnikov Kirill Aleksandrovich ORCID: 0009-0008-5216-8493 Graduate student; Faculty of Law; Kuban State Agrarian University named after I. T. Trubilin 350012, Russia, Krasnodar Territory, Krasnodar, Krasnye Partizan str., 1/3, building 7, sq. 14 ironfora@gmail.com Serbin Sergei Vladimirovich Graduate student; Faculty of Law; Kuban State Agrarian University 350044, Russia, Krasnodar Territory, Krasnodar, Kalinina str., 13 lknowangliyskiy@mail.ru

Vlezko Dmitrii Aleksandrovich PhD in Law Associate Professor; Department of Criminology; Kuban State Agrarian University 350044, Russia, Krasnodar Territory, Krasnodar, Kalinina str., 13 projects16@yandex.ru

In modern times, the development of information technology, along with the undoubted socially beneficial results, generates certain negative consequences. These include an increase in crime. After all, if earlier thieves and scammers had to go outside at least to carry out their "professional" activities, now they can realize their criminal intent remotely. In this regard, we would like to touch upon the activities of a crime investigator as a professional activity.

The purpose of this work is to investigate the problems associated with the implementation of the principle of optimal investigator workload and to develop recommendations for improving the efficiency of investigative agencies.

The relevance of the scientific article of this article is due to the need to improve the efficiency of the investigative authorities. With crime on the rise and the number of cases requiring investigation, the issue of rational allocation of working hours and the burden on investigators is becoming particularly important.

In addition, the relevance of this topic is related to the importance of creating favorable working conditions for investigators. Optimizing the workload will reduce stress and burnout among employees, as well as increase their motivation and job satisfaction. This, in turn, will contribute to improving the quality of investigations and strengthening public confidence in law enforcement agencies.

The article will identify the problems associated with the implementation of the optimal load principle and suggest ways to solve them. This will contribute to a more efficient use of investigative authorities' resources, reduce the risk of professional burnout for employees, and improve the quality of crime investigations.

Professor V.D. Zelensky defines investigation as a special social activity aimed at establishing the circumstances of the crime and the perpetrator, this activity is carried out through research, identification and study of traces- representations. ^[1] Based on this, it is obvious that the person conducting the investigation must have professional qualifications. In other words, to act based on both fundamental knowledge and practical knowledge acquired in the course of professional training, as well as life experience. It seems that life experience at the present stage of society's development cannot outpace the acquisition of theoretical knowledge. And, consequently, there may be situations when a novice investigator does not have any life experience, and investigating crimes is already his direct job responsibility. In connection with this situation, in the learning process, the future specialist studies the experience of previous generations, which is summarized in methodological recommendations. An important stage in the formation of a professional investigator is mastering the theoretical foundations of the organization of an investigation, which in a generalized form is a theoretical model of the investigation process, on the basis of which the investigator forms his immediate mental model in each individual case. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to develop clear and well-founded methodological recommendations for evaluating statistical information contained in accounting records. These recommendations should form the basis for forming an objective view of the work of investigators. They will help to take into account all aspects of their activities and ensure a more accurate assessment of the results of their work.

The organization of an investigation is the process of streamlining it by defining and specifying the circumstances to be established, planning, creating conditions for high–quality investigative actions, and the process of managing an investigation. ^[2] Like any other science, there are those fundamental directions that contain those unshakable principles, the violation of which is not allowed in any case. Similarly, crime investigation is a science in which principles objectively exist. They represent a set of interrelated directions, observing which, the binding core of this science is formed. The following principles must be observed in the organization of an investigation: compliance with the rights, powers and duties of the subjects of the investigation; centralization of the investigation and the leading role of the investigator; compliance of the investigator's professional level with the criminalistic complexity of the investigation; information support for the investigator; optimal workload of the investigator. ^[3]

This principle implies that the workload should be optimal and not cause excessive stress or overwork. To do this, it is necessary to provide the investigator with sufficient time to perform his duties efficiently and provide him with the necessary resources and support. The principle of a reasonable workload also suggests that an investigator should be able to plan his work and assign tasks according to priorities. This helps to avoid overloading and ensures more efficient use of time and resources. To implement this principle, it is necessary to regularly analyze the workload of investigators and identify factors that may affect its volume. Based on this analysis, measures can be developed to optimize the work and reduce the burden on investigators.

The principle of a reasonable investigator's workload involves taking into account many factors that affect the effectiveness of his activities. In particular, it is necessary to take into account the criminalistic complexity of various investigations, the time frame established for conducting criminal cases, as well as the need to comply with the principles of criminal procedure. In addition, it is necessary to take into account the level of professional training of the investigator, his ability to simultaneously perceive, retain and deeply analyze a large amount of information, as well as the degree of participation in the investigation by the staff of the investigative bodies. Based on the actual time spent on investigating crimes of a certain criminalistic complexity, the literature concludes that the investigator's maximum workload is high.^[6]

Of course, its boundaries are not absolutely categorical due to the inability to quantify some qualitative characteristics of the investigation process. For example, a simple investigation requires 20-30 business hours or 2-4 business days. The investigator can carry out such simple investigations within two months. It is precisely this maximum number of simple criminal cases that can be conditionally investigated by one investigator. But since the investigator investigates criminal cases of varying criminalistic complexity: simple, complicated, complex, and sometimes particularly complex, therefore, the number of criminal cases actually being handled by one investigator should be smaller. It will be different due to the different combinations of investigations of varying forensic complexity. Based on the average investigation time. The optimal workload of a qualified investigator should be no more than 6 complicated and one complex investigation, or no more than 10 complicated ones. A particularly complex investigation should be carried out, as a rule, by a group of investigators.

The investigator's workload is fluid. Regulation is one of the duties of the head of the investigative unit. The upper limit of the optimal workload should be the basis for the formation of the staff of investigators.

Currently, the burden on the investigator is a problematic issue in the professional work of an employee, as it can significantly affect the investigation of crimes. Let's identify two problematic aspects in the topic under consideration.

Firstly, these are ways to influence the investigator by his immediate supervisor, this applies not only to the distribution of case materials between investigators, but also to ways to reward and punish the supervisor. Thus, L.I. Bogatyreva established a relationship between the workload of employees and their disciplinary actions. Serving in conditions of constant intensification of professional activity increases the likelihood of bringing an employee to disciplinary responsibility. ^[4] The result of her work is a proposal to legislate the number of criminal proceedings conducted by one investigator during the year. We believe that the reason for this scientific work was the failure to follow methodological recommendations on the optimal workload for the investigator, which is related to both objective and subjective factors. In this regard, it is worth noting that the issue of internal regulations in the internal affairs bodies was not considered in the scientific work.

Secondly, it is an immediate indicator, which is given great attention when assessing the quality of work of each investigator individually, as well as the entire investigative body as a whole. For example, Baidin A.A. points out that the function of documenting the primary accounting of crimes, their perpetrators, criminal cases and reports on the results of investigative work is extremely important, since it contributes to the formation of an objective assessment of the activities of employees and the development of measures to improve the quality of the investigation ^[5]. We would also like to mention Article 51 of Federal Law No. 2202-1 dated January 17, 1992 "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation", which is called "The State Unified Statistical Accounting of data on the state of crime, as well as on crime reports, investigative work, inquiry, and prosecutor's supervision." This article indicates that the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation carries out the state unified statistical accounting of data on the state of crime, as well as on crime reports, investigative work, inquiry, and prosecutorial supervision (hereinafter referred to as the State unified statistical accounting), and conducts federal statistical surveillance based on primary statistical data provided by government agencies.

This accounting is carried out in accordance with Federal Law No. 282 dated 29.11.2007 "On Official Statistical Accounting and the System of State Statistics in the Russian Federation". The purpose of this Federal Law is to create a legal framework for the implementation of a unified state policy in the field of official statistical accounting aimed at meeting the information needs of the state and society for complete, reliable, scientifically based and timely official statistical information on social, economic, demographic, environmental and other social processes in the Russian Federation. The official statistical methodology includes methods for collecting, monitoring, editing, summarizing and grouping primary statistical and administrative data, compiling national accounts, evaluating the accuracy of official statistical information and systematizing it. The Order of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation dated 09.12.2022 No. 746 "On the state unified statistical accounting of data on the state of crime, as well as on reports of crimes, investigative work, inquiry, prosecutor's supervision", was created in order to establish a unified procedure for the organization and implementation of the state unified statistical accounting of data on the state of crime, as well as on reports of crimes, investigative work, inquiry, and prosecutor's supervision, guided by Articles 17 and 51 of the Federal Law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation." In accordance with paragraph "e", Part 1 of the Order of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation dated 09.12.2022 No. 746, the official statistical methodology used to generate official statistical information on the state of crime is approved. This methodology was developed in order to ensure the uniform application of concepts intended for the formation of official statistical information within the framework of the state unified statistical accounting of data on the state of crime, as well as on crime reports, investigative work, inquiry, and prosecutor's supervision. This methodology takes into account:

- objects of registration - a report on a crime, a criminal case, materials for verifying a report on a crime in which a decision was made to refuse to institute criminal proceedings due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution or in connection with the death of a person to be involved as a suspect or accused;

- accounting objects - information about the accepted report on the crime and the result of its consideration, about the crime, about the person specified in sections 8 and 9 of these Regulations, about the criminal case and the decisions taken on it, about the material damage caused by the crime and about ensuring its compensation, about the seized objects of criminal activity and criminal encroachments, the entry into force of a court decision (act) in a criminal case, and the results of prosecutorial supervision. And crime detection is the proportion of solved crimes, calculated as a percentage of the total number of solved and unsolved crimes. The detection rate is calculated without taking into account the crimes of previous years.

When examining these regulatory legal acts and analyzing them, it can be concluded that the greatest attention is paid to the information that is indicated in statistical records, namely its detail and consistency with reality. What is the positive side of this activity. However, it is worth noting that the evaluation of statistical information is deprived of sufficient attention. It is literally mentioned in Article 51 of the Federal Law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation", which records data on the state of crime. But the Order of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation dated 09.12.2022 No. 746 gives a more specific understanding of how the statistics of the same "Crime Detection" are formed. And in this aspect, we are talking only about the percentage of quantitative indicators.

Namely, the order contains provisions that fix the forms of accounting documents in the form of various statistical cards and departmental instructions on the procedure for providing primary statistical data on the state of crime, and other forms of accounting.

Directly, the investigative bodies and the bodies of inquiry, represented by the accounting of these bodies, form the final statistical data, which are subsequently transmitted to the supervisory authority and the state automated system of legal statistics.

At the same time, the GAS PS system itself has not yet been put into operation and is constantly being postponed, which causes difficulties in analyzing up-to-date statistical data that would help to analyze the burden on investigative authorities when filling out accounting and statistical data.

Accordingly, we can conclude that statistical data is recorded exclusively using the old accounting method, on paper, which is generated and accessed by investigative and supervisory authorities.

With the potential commissioning of the GAS PS by investigative and supervisory authorities, this will provide access to public statistical information, and provide up-to-date data carried out by investigative authorities when collecting statistics, which will allow a clear conclusion to be drawn about the workload that investigative officials are subjected to when generating statistical data.

In turn, I.A. Fomina, in his scientific work from 2022 entitled "Organization of the investigator's work", points out that there are always several criminal cases and materials in the investigator's production at the same time before the investigative check, and the investigator should ensure, if possible, parallel work on all of them. However, in an effort to ensure maximum continuity of the preliminary investigation for each of them, the investigator should identify the most important cases, conducting a preliminary investigation on them first. Thus, the author says that in the work of an investigator there is a division of criminal cases according to their importance, and suggests the following criteria:

- the law establishes shortened terms of the preliminary investigation;

- Detention has been chosen as a preventive measure against the accused;

- recognized as particularly relevant in this particular situation.

It is worth noting that these criteria are not exhaustive and may be subject to criticism and doubt.

We would like to note that when statistical accounting is on a par with the available methodological provisions, it is worth paying attention to the methodology for evaluating the data obtained. Otherwise, the result of the crime investigator's work is not fully presented at first, which later leads to a distorted interpretation of official statistics. Since the final conclusion on the state of crime is based more on the quantitative indicators of the investigator's work.

In turn, we want to direct the legislative and scientific part of society to develop methodological recommendations for evaluating statistical records in order to equate quantitative and qualitative indicators of the investigator's work, in order to form a complete and reliably interpreted view of the real situation of the investigator's work results. And first of all, it is worth starting with the formation of the fundamental directions of methodological recommendations for evaluating the statistical information contained in the accounts.

In this regard, we urge the legislative commission to develop methodological recommendations for evaluating statistical records. This will make it possible to equalize the quantitative and qualitative indicators of the investigator's work and form a complete and reliable picture of the real results of his activities.

First of all, it is necessary to determine the main directions of methodological recommendations for evaluating statistical information contained in accounting records. It is important to establish key indicators for evaluating the work of investigators and develop methods for calculating them. It is also necessary to take into account the specifics of the work of investigators and the features of statistical information.

Methodological recommendations should be based on scientific research and analysis of the practice of investigators. This will create a tool that will be useful both for evaluating current work and for planning future actions.

To ensure the reliability and completeness of statistical data, it is necessary to develop clear criteria for evaluating the work of investigators. These criteria should take into account both quantitative and qualitative performance indicators.

Quantitative indicators include:

• number of solved cases;
• the number of interrogations, confrontations, searches and other investigative actions conducted;
• the percentage of cases brought to court.

Qualitative indicators cover:

• the complexity and significance of the solved cases;
• the quality of the investigative actions carried out (for example, compliance with procedural rules, the use of modern investigative methods);
• the level of interaction with other law enforcement agencies.

To ensure the objectivity of the assessment, it is recommended to use the following methods:

• statistical data analysis;
• expert assessment (involving experienced investigators, prosecutors, judges);
• self-assessment (giving investigators the opportunity to evaluate their work based on developed criteria).

In order to simplify the formation of statistical quantitative and qualitative indicators, it is necessary to automate the process, which in the potential possible future represents the introduction of the GAS PS system in the work of investigative authorities.

By automating the process through an electronic system, investigators will be freed from paperwork to one degree or another, thereby having a positive effect in the exercise of their official duties.

Methodological recommendations should be based on scientific research and analysis of the practice of investigators. This will create a tool that will be useful both for evaluating current work and for planning future actions.

To ensure the reliability and completeness of statistical data on the work of investigators, it is necessary to develop clear criteria for evaluating their activities. These criteria should take into account both quantitative and qualitative performance indicators. It is also necessary to add to the criteria: the analysis and planning of the investigator's work, the distribution of workload, to form control and evaluation of the investigator's work, to provide criteria for the development and advanced training of investigative staff. Thus, it will contribute to the formation of more favorable measures in the implementation of the investigator's official duties and will contribute to the growth of professionalism and legality.

Methodological recommendations for evaluating the work of investigators should be based on scientific research and practice analysis. They will be useful for an objective assessment of current work and planning future actions.

This approach will make it possible to equalize quantitative and qualitative indicators, to form a complete and reliable picture of the investigator's work results. This, in turn, will help improve the efficiency of the investigative authorities and the quality of crime investigation.

Thus, the development and implementation of methodological recommendations for evaluating statistical records of the work of investigators is an important step towards improving the quality and effectiveness of their work. This will create a more accurate and objective picture of the state of crime and the results of the fight against it.

Methodological recommendations should become the basis for forming an objective assessment of the investigator's work. They will help to take into account all aspects of his activities and ensure a more accurate assessment of the results of his work.

Moreover, it is necessary to unify legislation and form a single methodological recommendation for all investigative bodies, which will consolidate the principle of optimal workload of investigative staff, form criteria and measures that will be based on quantitative and statistical data on the activities of investigators and the burden they are exposed to in the course of their professional duties.

The unification of all orders, instructions, recommendations, represented by a single provision, will get rid of many different outdated internal acts, create room for improving legislation in the field of investigative activities and the legal status of investigative staff, as well as, ideally, reduce the burden on investigators and eliminate confusion in a great variety of internal regulations in various fields. investigative agencies.

Consolidating the principle of optimal investigator workload, at least at the internal level of departments, will strengthen the investigator's professionalism, create more comfortable working conditions, create objective criteria for collecting and analyzing statistical data, and strengthen the rule of law and law and order in law enforcement agencies conducting preliminary investigations and inquiries.