Prosecution Authorities in the System of Subjects of Crime Prevention
Authors:   Volgograd State University, Fantrov Pavel , Shinkaruk Vladimir ,   Volgograd State University
Published: August 2022

Introduction: the paper deals with issues related to the essential characteristics of the prosecutor’s office and its definition in the system of subjects of crime prevention. Despite the fact that the functioning of the prosecutor’s office is aimed at preventing any offenses to ensure law and order, a unified concept of the legal regulation of its activities in this area has not been formed by law. This makes it necessary to improve the legislation in the field of coordination by the Prosecutor’s Office of the activities of the law enforcement agencies on crime prevention. The purpose of the study: to determine the role of the prosecutor’s office in the system of subjects of crime prevention. Objectives of the study: to assess the implementation of the powers of the prosecutor’s office in the system of subjects of crime prevention; to characterize the areas of coordination activities of the prosecutor’s office for the prevention of crimes; to identify the problems of the legal regulation of the activities of the prosecutor’s office in the field of crime prevention. Methods: the methodological framework for the study is represented by a set of methods of scientific cognition, among which it is necessary to distinguish the general scientific, systemic, comparative legal and institutional ones. Results: the priority development directions of the prosecutor’s office in the field of crime prevention are characterized; the mechanisms of coordination by the prosecutor’s office of the activities of other subjects on crime prevention are described; the actual problems of the activities of the prosecutor’s office in the context of crime prevention are identified, to which the authors of the paper refer: the imperfection of the legislative norms regulating the mechanism of interaction between the prosecutor’s office and other subjects of the crime prevention system; the lack of uniform registration methods of acts of prosecutorial inspections to prevent crimes; the ambiguity of the prosecutor’s powers in law-making; the absence of the prosecutor’s authority to give the investigator mandatory written instructions on the conduct of investigative and other procedural actions, the lack of authority to initiate criminal proceedings independently in cases of detection of violations of criminal law. Conclusions: the systematization of the legislation in the context of the implementation of effective measures to prevent crimes by the prosecutor’s office will increase the modernization potential of their activities. In particular, it is necessary to consolidate in the Federal Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation” a section defining the role of the prosecutor’s office in the crime prevention system. In addition, it is proposed to develop and adopt a separate Federal law “On the organization of the activities of state bodies, civil society structures to strengthen law and order in the Russian Federation”, where the leading role could be given to the prosecutor’s office.