The procedural status of the prosecutor at the stage of affirming an indictment

Introduction. The authors of the paper have studied the latest changes to the law of criminal procedure and analyzed the law enforcement practice concerning the procedural position of the prosecutor at the stage of affirming an indictment during pre-trial proceedings in criminal cases. In the scientific literature, controversial disputes regarding the implementation of procedural functions (the types of activities) by the prosecutor when affirming an indictment do not subside. Recently, the formal and superficial attitude of the investigator to the preparation of an important final procedural document has not allowed process scientists to stay indifferent to this issue. Special attention is paid by the authors to the implementation of the administrative powers of the prosecutor when studying the materials of a criminal case with an indictment. In the process of studying this problem, the authors set a goal to determine the role of the prosecutor in the implementation of procedural functions (the types of activities) when affirming an indictment. Methods. In the course of the research, the following methods of scientific cognition are applied: analysis, synthesis, comparative legal analysis. Results. Some theoretical problems requiring careful analysis have been identified, as well as the gaps in the law of criminal procedure regarding the implementation by the prosecutor of his procedural functions (the types of activities) when studying the materials of the criminal case received with an indictment. Conclusions. The most optimal and effective procedural models of the relationship between the prosecutor and the investigator at the end of the preliminary investigation, especially when affirming an indictment, have been developed.