Annotation. Introduction. The study, the results of which are presented in this article, examined the evolution of procedural compromise in criminal proceedings - from a tactical device for exposing the perpetrator to a systemic element of the strategy for combating crime. The aim of the work was to substantiate the need to develop a culture of procedural compromise as a unity of value guidelines, procedural forms, limits and guarantees. Methods. The study is based on general scientific (analysis, synthesis, systems approach) and specialized legal (formal-dogmatic, comparative-legal) methods. Results. The article analyzes scientific positions on issues of compromise procedures, the practice of their application, as well as the risks of deformation of compromise in the context of an accusatory bias and procedural formalism. Key aspects of the significance of compromise are identified: system-forming, procedural-economic, human rights, criminological, forensic and value-balancing. The substantive and procedural limits of compromise are defined, as well as the conditions for its legitimacy: voluntariness, transparency, adversarial proceedings, and the preservation of the public interest in serious and especially serious crimes. It is concluded that the implementation of compromise procedures requires a balanced approach that excludes the substitution of private interests for public interest. The boundaries of permissible compromise are determined not only by the category of crime but also by the presence of a genuine victim and the nature and extent of the harm caused. It is shown that developing a culture of procedural compromise requires the introduction of additional procedural guarantees: mandatory participation of defense counsel, recording of the victim's position, and reasoned judicial review.
Procedural compromise, limits of compromise, criminal policy, rationalization of legal proceedings, dispositivity, restorative justice
1. Kozlova Ye.L. Soblyudeniye printsipov ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva pri proizvodstve doznaniya v sokrashchennoy forme // X Baltiyskiy yuridicheskiy forum «Zakon i pravoporyadok v tret'yem tysyacheletii»: Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Kaliningrad: KF SPbU MVD Rossii, 2022. S. 20-21.
2. Anisimova A.P. K voprosu o spetsifike pravosoznaniya v rossiyskom obshchestve na sovremennom etape // Organy pravoporyadka: istoriya i sovremennost': Materialy mezhvuzovskoy nauchno-teoreticheskoy konferentsii. Yekaterinburg, 1998. S. 155-157.
3. Kuvaldina Yu.V. Kompromiss kak sposob razresheniya ugolovno-pravovykh konfliktov v Rossii: Monografiya / 2-ye izd. M.: Yustitsiya, 2016. 251 s.
4. Gerasimov A.V., Polyakov A.V. K voprosu informatsionnogo vozdeystviya na ob"yekty operativnoy zainteresovannosti // KH Baltiyskiy yuridicheskiy forum «Zakon i pravoporyadok v tret'yem tysyacheletii»: Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Kaliningrad: KF SPbU MVD Rossii, 2022. S. 60-61.
5. Sluchevskaya Yu.A. Mediatsiya kak sposob uregulirovaniya ekologicheskikh konfliktov // Zashchita prav gosudarstva i sub"yektov khozyaystvennoy (predprinimatel'skoy) deyatel'nosti v trudakh T.Ye. Abovoy: Sbornik nauchnykh trudov mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii. M.: Institut gosudarstva i prava RAN, 2025. S. 352-355.
6. Yefremova M.A., Abshilava G.V., Pastukhov P.S. Kompromiss v sisteme pravovogo regulirovaniya pri razreshenii ugolovno-pravovykh konfliktov // Vestnik ekonomiki, sotsiologii i prava. 2024. № 3. S. 111-118.
7. Popov S.V. O nekotorykh voprosakh razvitiya operativno-rozysknoy nauki // XI Baltiyskiy yuridicheskiy forum «Zakon i pravoporyadok v tret'yem tysyacheletii»: Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Kaliningrad: KF SPbU MVD Rossii, 2023. S. 62-63.
8. Markelov A.G. Ideya kompromissa v rossiyskom ugolovnom protsesse kak mera protivodeystviya prestupnosti // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pravo. 2021. № 39. S. 48-59.
9. Gerasimov A.V., Polyakov A.V. Psikhologicheskiye osobennosti operativno-rozysknogo obespecheniya provedeniya otdel'nykh sledstvennykh deystviy // VIII Baltiyskiy yuridicheskiy forum «Zakon i pravoporyadok v tret'yem tysyacheletii»: Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Kaliningrad: KF SPbU MVD Rossii, 2020. S. 144-146.
10. Polyakov A.V., Grineva D.A. O vozmozhnostyakh ispol'zovaniya informatsionnykh tekhnologiy v reshenii zadach operativno-rozysknoy deyatel'nosti // Mezhvedomstvennyy nauchno-prakticheskiy Peterburgskiy operativno-rozysknoy forum: Materialy mezhvedomstvennoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. SPb: SPbU MVD Rossii, 2025. S. 211-215.
11. Sluchevskaya YU.A. Potentsial ispol'zovaniya v ugolovnom prave sudebnogo shtrafa v kachestve kompensatsionno-vosstanovitel'nogo mekhanizma // Ugolovnaya politika i pravoprimenitel'naya praktika: Sbornik nauchnykh statey po rezul'tatam raboty vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. SPb: Asterion, 2025. S. 420-423.
12. Pakhomova O.N. Aktual'nyye problemy kvalifikatsii prestupleniy v kreditnoy sfere // IX Baltiyskiy yuridicheskiy forum «Zakon i pravoporyadok v tret'yem tysyacheletii»: Materialy mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Kaliningrad: KF SPbU MVD Rossii, 2021. S. 67-68.
13. Markelov A.G., Polyakov M.P. Ideya ugolovno-protsessual'nogo kompromissa pri zaklyuchenii dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve: Monografiya. M.: Prospekt, 2023. 193 s.
14. Anisimova A.P. Prichiny nizkogo urovnya pravosoznaniya sovremennogo rossiyskogo obshchestva // Stanovleniye i razvitiye nauchnykh shkol prava v gosudarstvennykh universitetakh Rossii: Materialy vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Ch. 3. SPb, 1999. S. 32-34.
15. Petrova O.V. Vnedreniye mediatsii v mekhanizme ugolovnoy politiki Respubliki Belarus' // Nauchnyy zhurnal «Epomen». 2021. № 66. S. 84-94.
