Concise summaries of ten years of application of the criminal procedural law (stage of pre-trial investigation)

Abstract

The work is devoted to the passage of ten years since the entry into force of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in November 2012. The purpose of the work is to determine those changes in the legislative regulation of the current institutions of the criminal process, which can be considered as global; a brief study of new institutes. Methods - comparative, statistical. Subjected to the study of the purpose of the implementation of the Criminal Procedure Code of 2012, the main principles of the reform of the procedural law as a component of the judicial reform and the reform of the law enforcement system, the measures that were proposed to be taken to achieve the specified goal. The number of laws amending procedural codes was analyzed. Attention was paid to the implementation of new institutions - in particular, the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations, secret investigative (detective) actions, opening of pre-trial investigation materials, indictments, bringing to criminal liability on the basis of agreements; identified shortcomings of their normative regulation and practical application are given. The indictment is compared with the indictment; the register of pre-trial investigation materials and a certificate on the progress of a criminal case. The institutes of private prosecution during the operation of various procedural laws are compared. Attention was paid to the liquidation of the formal act - the resolution on the initiation of a criminal case; instead, the emergence of a new formal act - an extract from the unified register of pre-trial investigations - was assessed. The liquidation of the institution of additional investigation was noted, but on the contrary, attention was drawn to the court's right to return the indictment to the prosecutor as one that does not meet the requirements of the law. The appearance of new subjects of the process is emphasized - for example, the applicant, the whistleblower, etc.; about the emergence of new mechanisms of procedural coercion - in the form of monetary penalties; on the emergence of new bodies of pre-trial investigation - SBI, NABU; on the emergence of a new judicial institution - the High Anti-Corruption Court. Attention was drawn to the imperfection of changes in the legal regulation of recording the actions and decisions of officials of the prosecution, changes in the regulation of specific investigative actions. Attention was also paid to changes in the law, which were subsequently canceled due to their ineffectiveness. As a conclusion, doubts were expressed about the need to adopt the Criminal Procedure Code in its current version.