On Conventionality (Consent) in Judicial and Legal Science. Article Two. On the Divergent Vectors in the Justification of a Number of Key Provisions in Judicial Law: The Author's View on Some Challenges of the "Current Moment"

<jats:p>The reader is offered the second publication from a series of articles on the problems of achieving an acceptable level of conventionality (consensus) in judicial and legal science. The immediate subjects of our present study are, firstly, the very legal state — conventionality (consensus) in science as a problem. Secondly, the contradictory practice of the institution of "the court returning a criminal case to the prosecutor for conducting additional investigation" (Article 237 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation) is examined. Thirdly, the following are analyzed: 1) the true meaning of the content of Articles 318–318 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, as interpreted by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in Ruling No. 50 of July 17, 2026; 2) the active role of the judge vs. adversariality in the consideration of private prosecution criminal cases.</jats:p>