Forensic Regulatory Examination and Anti-Corruption Examination: Common Features and Peculiarities

Legal science and law enforcement practice use various terminology related to the definition of examinations conducted in relation to regulatory legal acts and draft regulatory legal acts: legal examination, forensic regulatory examination and anti‑corruption examination. The first two terms are often used synonymously, which is not justified. The authors do not always distinguish between these types of examinations, but it is necessary to make such a distinction for proper law enforcement. This predetermined the purpose of the study. In addition to general scientific methods based on a dialectical approach, formal legal and expert assessment methods were used. The analysis made it possible to identify common features and differences between forensic regulatory and anti‑corruption expertise, to distinguish between legal and anti‑corruption expertise. Anti‑corruption expertise is defined as a study of a regulatory legal act or its draft according to an approved methodology, conducted by a knowledgeable person (expert) with special knowledge, in order to detect corruption‑causing factors in the act and take measures to eliminate them, the results of which are formalized in the form of an opinion and taken into account in the law‑making activities of the relevant body. Forensic regulatory examination has its own subject, object, and research methods based on various fields of scientific knowledge. With this in mind, forensic regulatory expertise can be defined as a type of expertise within certain classes and types of forensic expertise (for example, forensic economics, construction, computer engineering, etc.), when there is a need to study regulatory and regulatory acts as objects and solve the above tasks in connection with comprehensive application of both legal expertise and knowledge in other fields.