Criminal procedure truth in the system of evaluative categories

Introduction: determining the content of evaluative vocabulary in criminal procedure law and the proposed classification of evaluative expressions determine the formulation of the problem of ambiguity in referring certain terms to the evaluative category. It is noted that evaluative concepts, ambiguous in nature, and concepts, incorrectly and inappropriately used in legal framing are often mistakenly mixed. In this regard, the purpose of the research is to distinguish proper evaluative concepts from concepts of fuzzy and indefinite, as well as to differentiate the first ones depending on the degree of abstraction, thus showing the system of evaluative categories. The methodological framework for the study is the general scientific (dialectical, systemic, structural and functional, logical, etc.) and the specific scientific (formal legal, comparative law, historical and legal, etc.) research methods. Results: the author’s point of view on the criminal procedure truth as an evaluative category is shown. Before that, in numerous works devoted to the establishment of truth in criminal proceedings it was primarily about the nature of the truth - whether it is objective or subjective, formal, and whether to consider it as a purpose of criminal proceedings. Conclusions: the criminal procedure truth should be considered as an evaluative category, regardless of whether it is fixed at the legislative level or not. Thus, it is concluded that there is a system of evaluative categories in the criminal process, including concepts which are different in abstraction degrees, regardless of their legal consolidation.