Abstract
The delineation of the semantic framework of the term “remote investigative action” constitutes a pivotal element in addressing the issue of the feasibility and admissibility of employing remote technologies in the process of criminal procedural evidence-gathering. Within this context, the present study undertakes a critical assessment of the existing developments in the theory of criminal procedure and forensic science, identifying key deficiencies that stem from an overly expressive approach — one that primarily seeks to articulate a formally respectable academic stance at the preliminary stage of conceptual exploration. The authors emphasize that investigative actions, by their very nature, serve as juridical instruments reflecting the normative structure of both formal and dialectical logic. Accordingly, it is underscored that the remote format of investigative actions constitutes a novel digital innovation — an emergent achievement of contemporary science — which, like any technological advancement, possesses both merits and limitations. It is posited that the implementation of remote technologies in investigative practice pertains predominantly to a forensic (organizational and tactical) domain, while within the procedural (legal) framework, it remains subject to the general evidentiary standards governing admissibility and probative value. Hence, the application of remote technologies to investigative activities is inherently linked to the ability to authenticate and verify factual accuracy. However, the epistemological constraints inherent in the remote cognition of objective reality preclude the full realization of such verification. In view of this, the authors propose a working definition of “remote investigative action” and proceed to elaborate its substantive content through a criterial analysis of its essential attributes. The decomposition of these criteria — epistemological, psychological, organizational (tactical), and technical — enables the determination of the admissibility or inadmissibility of the remote format in relation to specific types of investigative actions, while also facilitating a more structured and methodologically sound assessment of the reliability of the evidentiary outcomes thereby obtained.