Abstract
The paper considers the question of the role and nature of the truth in criminal procedure, in respect of which the arguments continue at present in the theory of criminal procedure law. However, the changes of fundamental principles of the criminal proceeding under the influence of the introduction of the adversarial principle and the principle of presumption of innocence in it cause the revision of the traditional wisdom both about the goal of criminal procedure and the ways of its achievement.
The differentiation of form of action is initially the differentiation of the goals and the proof proceeding based on the principle of presumption of innocence making the goals, rules and the result of evidence conditional on the position of a defendant. The differentiation of criminally-remedial form of action involves both the differences in the standards of proof and in the criteria of evaluation of a sentence as well. Based on the specified approach, the author formulates the proposals aimed at the overcoming of theoretic differences by standardization of the results of the criminally-remedial activities.
Despite the absence of the whole picture of reasons for the differentiation of criminally-remedial form, two relatively independent systems of criminal proceedings have been formed in Russia by now. As a major criterion that allows selecting the form of action efficient for a certain case, it is offered to consider the goal of the criminal proceeding – reaching the truth or compromise – depending on the position of a defendant. In the result of the study, the author makes the conclusion on how the differentiation of forms of action influences the implementation of the criminal proceeding principles. The paper shows that the modern system of criminal proceeding of Russia cannot be described without simplified procedures.
Email this article 
