ЗАСТОСУВАННЯ ПРОКУРОРОМ ТИМЧАСОВОГО ДОСТУПУ ДО РЕЧЕЙ І ДОКУМЕНТІВ ПІД ЧАС РЕАЛІЗАЦІЇ ФУНКЦІЇ ОБВИНУВАЧЕННЯ

Abstract

The article is devoted to one of the effective means of obtaining evidence in criminal proceedings – temporary access to things and documents, the legal regulation of which is defined in Chapter 15 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. Attention is drawn to a number of problematic issues related to the prosecutor's use of temporary access to things and documents in the exercise of the function of prosecution, the presence of which does not ensure the effectiveness of criminal procedural evidence and the effectiveness of this institution in criminal proceedings. According to the results of the study, the author concludes that the use of temporary units to temporarily access things and documents on the basis of a prosecutor's order makes it impossible to recognize the results of such action as evidence in criminal proceedings, as they do not meet the admissibility requirement. Prosecutorial oversight in criminal proceedings should not only ensure the inevitability of criminal punishment, but also ensure proper respect for human rights in criminal proceedings, respect for the individual, treatment as a person whose guilt has not yet been proven, and ensure impartiality and objectivity of the pre-trial investigation. Based on the results of the analysis of the decisions made by the investigating judge based on the results of consideration of the petitions, the author identified the grounds for the prosecutor's refusal to satisfy these petitions by the investigating judges. It is proposed to expand the procedural powers of the prosecutor as a subject of criminal procedural evidence, giving him the right to instruct operational units to conduct not only investigative (investigative) and covert investigative (investigative) actions, but also other procedural actions. Thus, taking into account the results of the analysis of scientific literature and materials of law enforcement practice, we can conclude that it is necessary to expand the procedural powers of the prosecutor as a subject of criminal procedural evidence by stating paragraph 5 Рart 2 of Art. 36 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in the following wording: «to instruct the investigative (search) actions and covert investigative (search) actions or other procedural actions to the relevant operational units», as well as the need to supplement Part 1 of Art. 41 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine by the authority of operational units to carry out other procedural actions on behalf of the prosecutor.