Some legal aspects of prosecutor’s participation in cases of administrative offences during application of coercive measures related to restriction of personal freedom of citizens

Abstract

The article deals with the legal characteristics of the prosecutor’s participation in cases of administrative offences during the application of coercive measures related to the restriction of the personal freedom of citizens.
 The legislation on administrative offences is analysed with relevant conclusions about those categories of cases, the consideration of which is impossible without the participation of a prosecutor.
 The attention is focused on the fact that the departmental acts of the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine provide for mandatory provision for the participation of prosecutors in cases of administrative offences if coercive measures related to the restriction of personal freedom of citizens are applied.
 Parallels are drawn between the direct participation of a prosecutor in the consideration of cases of administrative offences and the prosecutor’s supervision of the relevant bodies that carry out the consideration of cases and apply coercive measures for administrative offences.
 The authors of the article also draw attention to the fact that the prosecutor’s supervision of compliance with the laws in administrative offence cases can be divided into two categories:
 
 Direct participation in the consideration of a case on the administrative offence;
 Supervision over the relevant bodies that review cases and apply coercive measures for administrative 
 
 The authors differentiate coercive measures related to the restriction of personal freedom of citizens, which are used in cases of administrative offences. In particular:
 
 The type of administrative sanction provided for in 24 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences (hereinafter – CUAO) [1, Art. 24] (for example, administrative arrest, arrest with military detention, forced (administrative) deportation outside Ukraine);
 The measure to ensure proceedings in cases of administrative offences, provided for in Art. 260 CUAO [1, 260] (for example, administrative detention).
 
 The article also draws attention to the conclusions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the observance of the principle of impartiality in the absence of a prosecutor during proceedings in cases of administrative offences, etc.