Cancellation of a preventive measure in the form of detention under martial law in the context of Art. 616 of the CPC of Ukraine

Abstract

The actual changes to the CPC of Ukraine made in connection with the introduction of the martial law have been highlighted. Peculiarities of cancellation and change of preventive measures in the form of detention under martial law in the context of Art. 616 of the CPC of Ukraine have been studied. With the introduction of martial law in Ukraine on February 24, 2022, in connection with the military aggression of the Russian Federation, a number of significant changes have been made both to section IX-1 and to other sections of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The essence of the procedure for canceling and changing a preventive measure in the form of detention under martial law has been revealed, namely, it has been clarified that this process is complex and contradictory, as there is no clear mechanism for its practical application.
 The deployment of military aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in the legal field became a determinant of numerous changes to the current legal acts, in particular the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The norm provided for by Art. 616 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, is aimed at realizing the right of a suspect, an accused person to apply to the prosecutor with a request for the cancellation of a preventive measure in the form of detention for the purpose of military service during mobilization, for a special period in the event of the introduction of martial law in Ukraine or some of its localities , implementation of measures to ensure national security and defense, repel and deter armed aggression by the Russian Federation and/or other states against Ukraine. It is important to highlight the indeterminacy of the term of consideration by the prosecutor of the request of the suspect, the accused to complete military service, which can be the cause of delay in order to obtain an illegal benefit by an official or to achieve other goals for the satisfaction of private interest.
 Attention has been also drawn to the fact that a preventive measure in the form of detention was applied to the person submitting the relevant petition, which in a certain way complicates the procedure of passing a military medical examination to determine his/her suitability for military service. The problems of the implementation of this norm gave been clarified, which is indicated by some of its imperfections, in particular, the lack of a temporal definition, the requirement of the legislator to highlight in the petition the points related to risk analysis.