Research Methodology of Principles of the Prosecutor's Professional Activity

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to select methods and methodological approaches that are the most optimal and effective in studying the principles of the prosecutor's professional activity, as well as to carry out their detailed functional analysis. Methodology: Without violating the laws of the research, the most common methodological structure was chosen for the study of the basics of the prosecutor's professional activity, which consists of three levels: 1) philosophical and worldview, 2) general scientific, 3) special scientific methods. Research results: The author offers a three-fold approach to choosing a methodology for researching the principles of the prosecutor's professional activity. He emphasizing that these methods: first, are effective and their action should reproduce a certain limited (non-universal) environment – in this case, it is legal practice, activity, the prosecutor through the prism of political neutrality; secondly, they focus primarily on the science of jurisprudence with a predominance of the applied cognitive aspect; thirdly, must to demonstrate the scientific value (usefulness) of research results through interdisciplinary methodological communication. Scientific innovation: The connection of the study with such scientific problems as the activities of the prosecutor's office regarding the organization and procedural management of pretrial investigation bodies and the maintenance of the state prosecution in court, in the context of the prosecutors' observance of the principle of political neutrality, demonstrates the need to study them on the basis of the previously described methodological provision. Practical significance: In general, the author does not propose a unanimous approach to methods in the scientific environment; no method in scientific knowledge is considered neutral, uninvolved, and independent of social orientations, worldview, beliefs and aspirations of the researcher. At the same time, he opposes any monopolization of methodological approaches and at the same time for the pluralism of research methods used, as this is a necessary prerequisite for the objectivity of knowledge of objects and phenomena, the progressive development of science, and the freedom of scientific creativity. At the same time, it is emphasized that methodological pluralism should not turn into methodological anarchism.

Keywords: methodology; methodological pluralism; political neutrality; jurisprudence; professional activity of the prosecutor; legal practice.