Problems of using the evidence collected during the investigation in criminal proceedings regarding the crime

Abstract

The article raises issues relevant to judicial practice related to the interpretation and application by investigative judges of Art. 298-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code «Procedural sources of evidence in criminal proceedings on criminal misdemeanours». The introduction of the institution of criminal misdemeanour into the national legal system led to significant changes in the normative regulation of the procedural order of inquiry, however, the short-term practice of implementing the norms of criminal procedural legislation regarding the investigation of misdemeanours revealed problems of a law enforcement nature, which are partly caused by the lack of proper legal regulation, legal uncertainty of individual norms, as well as the unity of judicial practice. In particular, Art. 298-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for new, compared to the ordinary procedural order, sources of evidence (explanations of persons, results of a medical examination, a specialist's opinion, indications of technical devices and technical means that have the functions of photo and film shooting, video recording, or means of photo and film shooting, video recording). In addition, the CPC established that the procedural sources of evidence collected during the inquiry cannot be used in criminal proceedings regarding the crime, except on the basis of the decision of the investigating judge, which is issued at the request of a prosecutor. The lack of a legal definition in the given provision of the article led to the lack of uniformity in the practice of considering prosecutors’ requests regarding the possibility of using sources of evidence collected during the inquiry. Based on the conducted generalisation of the practice of examining motions of investigative judges, the authors of the article came to the conclusion of the need to interpret the considered article in its unity, not allowing two different approaches regarding the possibility of creating a separate procedural regime in relation to traditional evidence (Article 84) and those inherent only to misdemeanour proceedings (Article 298-1 of the CPC). In addition, in the article, the authors draw attention to the violation of the norms of the current legislation regarding the improper subject of petitioning the investigating judge, provide recommendations regarding the subject of judicial control in accordance with Art. 298-1 of the СPC, draw attention to problematic points related to the implementation of the provisions of Art. 298-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the case of combining materials of criminal proceedings regarding a crime and a misdemeanour, propose the content of the prosecutor's request to the investigating judge, and consider other issues relevant to judicial practice. Key words: investigative judge, judicial control, judicial review proceedings, due legal procedure, criminal misdemeanour, crime, evidence, procedural sources of evidence, inquiry, pre-trial investigation, prosecutor’s request.