The purpose of proof in the criminal proceedings on infringement of intellectual property rights: truth or procedural justice?

The article summarizes the existing discussible approaches of domestic and foreign scholars to understanding of the purpose of criminal procedural proof and the search for truth. The legislation of Ukraine, norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Criminal Procedure Codes of a number of European countries, modern approaches of US courts, the Supreme Court [of Ukraine], the European Court of Human Rights on normative consolidation of the purpose of criminal procedural proof and application of the law are analyzed. On the basis of an excursion in the history of science the basic theories of truth are highlighted. It has been established that the theory of objective truth has prevailed in science for a long time, but attention is drawn to the fact that it is increasingly criticized in favor of efficiency of criminal proceedings through applying relevant legal procedures. Judicial practice shows a shift in emphasis from establishing the truth to procedural justice aimed at achieving the optimal model of the purpose of criminal proceedings and proof. The approaches to the purpose of proof and the search for truth of various subjects in criminal proceedings on infringement of intellectual property rights and efficiency of applying conventional truth are substantiated. The own vision of the concept of the purpose of proof is proposed and propositions on improvement of the procedural legislation of Ukraine are provided.