Integrative doctrine of evidence-based law.

The article on the basis of integrative analysis of the problems of evidence in various legal processes substantiates the conclusion about the need to establish an integrative doctrine of evidence law and adopt a universal legislative act - the «Code of Evidence Law». The implementation of the rule of law in the field of justice is possible only if there is a fundamental doctrine of evidence-based law and a perfect evidentiary law created on its basis. In the context of the formation of its doctrinal principles and individual legal institutions, we propose to enshrine here the following provisions: Actual data obtained through the implementation of operational and search actions, anti-corruption measures, activities to prevent the legalization of proceeds from crime, customs and other administrative or civil procedure procedures stipulated by law can be used in criminal procedure and other legal evidence, provided that the source and method of their receipt can be verified. In admissive are the evidence obtained from such sources, such means and in such a manner, in which the proper observance of the protection of human rights and freedoms in accordance with the requirements of the rule of law and the principle of proportionality is not ensured, and the authenticity of the evidence itself is questioned. In legislation of Ukraine proposes to consolidate the following provisions: «Evidence materials obtained as a result of provocation of a crime obtained with significant violation of human rights and freedoms are inadmissible, whether «the fruits of a poisonous tree, materials obtained in violation of other legal norms, the prescriptions of which created certain guarantees of obtaining reliable factual data. Inadmissible are the evidence obtained from such sources, such means and in such a manner, in which the proper observance of the protection of human rights and freedoms is not ensured in accordance with the requirements of the rule of law and the principle of proportionality, as well as question the authenticity of the evidence itself. The standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt means that the system of admissible and reliable evidence excludes any other reasonable explanation of the event that is the subject of trial, in addition to the one that is formed in the court decision.