{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015311004784688996, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.836601307189542, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Features of Reforming Procedural Legislation as an Obstacle to the Convergence of Criminal, Civil, Arbitration and Administrative Processes

The negative impact of the existing legislative approach to reforming the criminal process on the possibility of its convergence with other procedural branches is considered. The unjustified separation of bills on reforming the CPC within the framework of unified procedural transformations is noted. Separate legislative work on the criminal process, on the one hand, and arbitration, civil and administrative, on the other hand, leads to the emergence of additional unjustified differences in the normative consolidation of universal institutions. Specific examples of undesirable divergence of lawsuits caused by uncoordinated lawmaking are given. The absence of convergence of procedural law among the goals of both sectoral, in particular, criminal procedure policy, and judicial policy is noted. The necessity of developing the concept and directions of judicial procedural policy is substantiated.