Review

The historical aspect of the exclusion of evidence based on rumors is observed for the first time in the thirteenth century. In the English case-law this practice was recognized in the decision-making process. For many years, this rule has developed in line with the recognition of the need for greater reliability of testimony from witnesses. The beginning of the nineteenth century is characterized by the attention of law specialists to the delineation of the boundaries of this rule and the formulation of exceptions to it. There were two main approaches at that stage, one of which showed that evidence based on rumors should be ruled out, except for cases where their admissibility was recognized. While in case of the other approach – the required evidence, based on general rules, is permissible, with the exception of particular cases.

Formulation of the problem. Currently, in the countries of both the general and the continental system of law prevails the first approach in this regard. In Ukraine it is also used, although it is not legally fixed at the same time.

In a detailed analysis of recent research and publications, I noted that the problem of foreign words is poorly researched, which makes the study relevant because it is conducted for the first time.

The purpose of the article is to find out the use of foreign language words taken from foreign law and compare them with domestic law.

The article uses an approach according to which the testimony from alien words is explored as directly related to the right of the accused to interrogate the persons indicating on the side of the charge. In the context of the article, the criminal procedural legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany, the CPC of Georgia, the CPC of the Republic of Moldova, the CPC of the Russian Federation, the criminal procedural rules of the United States and England have been analyzed, and a comparative analysis of these norms with the relevant norms of Ukrainian criminal procedural legislation has been conducted.

After analyzing the above, it is determined that Anglo-American law regards the testimony of the witness "hearsay" as an institution that plays a fundamental role in the exercise of the functions of justice, and the rules of admissibility of testimony from other people's words for the CPC of Ukraine are a kind of borrowing from the provisions of the doctrine of "hearsay" .

It is also emphasized that in the testimony of a witness from other people's words within Ukraine there is a certain unreliability and a considerable probability of their erroneousness, because the person is a kind of retransmitter of perception of information and memory of another person about the event, and, accordingly, the truth of such testimony is questionable.

Key words: testimony from foreign words, foreign legislation, domestic legislation, hearsay.