THE STATE BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS WITHIN THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION STRUCTURE: ECONOMIC AND LEGAL DETERMINANTS

Abstract

The subject of the present study is the conceptual, theoretical, empirical, and methodological foundations for the creation and functioning of the State Bureau of Investigation within the public administration structure in economic and legal terms. Methodology. The study employed both general and specific methods of cognition. The present study employs the dialectical method to assess the essence of the State Bureau of Investigation within the structure of public administration in the legal and economic spheres, with a particular focus on comparisons with the experience of other countries. The analysis provided an opportunity to study the static data on the work of the State Bureau of Investigation in 2022 and 2024. This made it possible to identify characteristic economic features in the implementation of this state body's functions, as well as the impact of its activities on socio-economic, political and legal processes in the country over time. The synthesis established the basis for generalising the distinguishing features of the State Bureau of Investigation in terms of the organisational and legal requirements for its establishment, and the categorisation of criminal offences within its remit. The formal-legal method enabled the correct interpretation of normative-legal acts determining the State Bureau of Investigation's general and special legal status within the public administration structure, as well as the specifics of its powers within the security and defence sector. The purpose of the present article is to determine the prerequisites for the creation and functioning of the State Bureau of Investigation within the structure of public administration in economic and legal terms. The results of the study demonstrated that the prerequisites for the establishment and operation of the State Bureau of Investigation within the framework of public administration are economic and legal factors. These factors are, in general terms, functionally dependent on categories such as economic security, macroeconomic indicators of the life of the state and society, national security, and the most prevalent criminal offences. Proposals were made regarding the introduction of public control institutions within the remit of this state authority, and its position within the public administration structure was determined. Conclusion. Trends have been identified in the growing influence of this state authority on socio-economic processes. This influence can be seen in all types of offences under its jurisdiction, as well as in events that have the greatest impact on public life and the economic development of the country. The economic factors that led to the establishment and operation of the State Bureau of Investigation as a special powers state authority form the general and specific prerequisites for its activities. The economic consequences of this body's activities have both direct and indirect links to a number of sectors of society and the state, including innovative construction activities, corporate instruments for economic development, public-private partnerships, etc. It is evident that a considered opinion has been formulated regarding the dual nature of the competence of this state body within the broader context of the security and defence sector. This competence is manifested in two distinct capacities: firstly, in ensuring national security within the context of peaceful societal and state circumstances, and secondly, in ensuring the defence of the state, particularly during the legal regime of martial law. It has been proven that the establishment of the State Bureau of Investigation in the Ukrainian legal sphere is contingent upon the constitutional provision that entails the transfer of a number of competencies from the prosecutor's office to an autonomous pre-trial investigation entity that is endowed with the requisite capabilities. The scientific position on the rationalisation of the structure and powers of this state body, especially discretionary powers, has been endorsed by law enforcement agencies that ensure the investigation of relevant categories of criminal cases with the achievement of set tasks. It was asserted that the legal status of the prosecutor could be determined by drawing upon the positive experiences of certain countries, as well as by granting officials of the State Bureau of Investigation a range of exceptional powers in the conduct of investigative actions that can be carried out without the consent of the prosecutor or investigating judge. A comparison of the preconditions for the establishment of the SBI and the FBI reveals that, in the former case, there was a response from society and the state to internal threats, while in the latter case, there was a response to external threats. A comparison of the preconditions for the creation and powers of the SBI and the National Bureau of Investigation of Slovenia reveals several notable features. Firstly, there is the need to ensure national security within the scope of the functions of a law enforcement agency with qualifying powers. Secondly, there are qualified criminal offences in the scope of activities. Thirdly, there is the need to supplement the functions of traditional law enforcement agencies and transfer them to a separate body with exclusive powers.