Criminal Procedural Code Of Ukraine Research Articles

Procedural decision of the detective to start a pre-trial investigation: some problematic issues

The article is devoted to problems related to the legal regulation of the detective’s procedural decision to initiate a pre-trial investigation. It was noted that although the legislator did not define the adoption of a separate procedural decision of the detective to start a pre-trial investigation, such a decision is embodied (enveloped) not in a procedural document, but in a procedural action - entering information about a criminal offense into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations. The problem of improper legislative regulation of the interaction between the detective and the head of the detectives department regarding the adoption of the specified procedural decision is outlined. The departmental acts of the ESBU and the NABU in relation to the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine were studied, on the basis of which it was concluded that the adoption of a procedural decision by the detective to start a pre-trial investigation is preceded by an order from the head of the detectives department to consider a statement, notification of the commission of a criminal offense in accordance with Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (although such an order is not expressly provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine). Particular attention was paid to the legislator’s uncertainty of such interaction in case defective learns on his own about circumstances which are likely to indicate that a criminal offence has been committed, in connection with which possible options for such procedural interaction were considered: a) independent entry of information by the detective into the Unified Register of Pre­Trial Investigations with immediate notification of the head of the prosecutor’s office; b) notification by the detective to the head of the detectives department about the independent detection of signs of a criminal offense without independently entering such information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations. The opinion that the last option of interaction is correct is substantiated. The scientific discussion is continued regarding the issues related to the literal interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding the duty of the detective to enter information into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations on the basis of the submitted application, notification of the committed criminal offense regardless of their content. The current practice of investigative judges is analyzed, based on which the formed approaches to understanding the grounds for making a procedural decision to start a pre-trial investigation based on statements and reports of the commission of a criminal offense are highlighted. The solutions of the outlined problematic aspects by making changes to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine are proposed.

Legal principles of pre-trial investigation war crimes

The modern legal principles of the activity of law enforcement agencies regarding the investigation of war crimes have been defined. It is emphasized that war crimes are complex in terms of their mechanism of commission, which is characterized by consequences in the form of significant destruction of civilian infrastructure objects, a large number of unidentified dead; instruments of commission, which neither pre-trial investigation bodies nor forensic experts have encountered before; by persons of criminals who change their locations, including those who are in the territory of another state, etc. It is noted that in Ukraine since the declaration of the legal regime of martial law by the Decree of the President of Ukraine, significant changes have taken place in the criminal procedural legislation, which established a special regime of pre-trial investigation and trial under martial law conditions, provided for in Section IX-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. It is noted that the pre-trial investigation of war crimes requires considerable expenditure of resources, including human resources, due to which employees of various law enforcement agencies, including units of the National Police, are involved in carrying out certain procedural actions. Legal problems in the activities of the National Police of Ukraine regarding the organizational features of the pre-trial investigation that need to be resolved at the legislative and departmental levels are highlighted. Proposals are made to improve the legislation on the regulation of the term “war crime” in the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The requirements regarding the procedure for collecting evidence of war crimes for the purpose of further transfer of materials for consideration by the International Criminal Court have been updated. Attention is focused on the fact that the principles, subjects and forms of interaction at the national and international levels during the pre-trial investigation of war crimes should be properly regulated. During the writing of the article, the methods of dialectics, comparative legal and systemic analysis, and formal logic were used.

Notification of suspicion on the web page of the General Prosecutor’s Office and in the newspaper “Uryadovyi Kurier”: requirements and algorithm of publication

The study is aimed at analysing the legal acts establishing the procedure for publishing notices of suspicion on the website of the Prosecutor General’s Office and in the newspaper “Uryadovyi Kurier” and notices of suspicion already published in these sources, determining the requirements for them and developing an algorithm for publication for prosecutors and investigators. The author uses the methods of analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, comparative legal, formal and logical, systemic and structural, graphical and other methods of scientific research. The article establishes that the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine defines the obligation of an investigator or prosecutor to serve a notice of suspicion by publishing it on the website of the Office of the Prosecutor General and in the mass media of national distribution. This method of delivery is possible for both general and special pre-trial investigation regimes. It is emphasised that the notice of suspicion to be published on the website and in the mass media of the national sphere of distribution have differences in content, format, data that may be made public, and place of publication. In order to prevent possible violations, the requirements for suspicion notifications are detailed and visualised in the form of a table. It is found that the procedure for publishing notices of suspicion for investigators and prosecutors is different. The author identifies the stages required for publishing notices of suspicion for investigators and prosecutors and develops appropriate algorithms. The findings of the study can be used in lawmaking activities in the development and improvement of regulations on this topic, in practical activities by investigators of pre-trial investigation bodies, prosecutors when serving a person with a notice of suspicion, in scientific activities to continue research in this area, in educational activities to prepare materials for teaching students, cadets, trainees in legal specialties and for advanced training of investigators and prosecutors.

Correlation of the concept of «judicial control» with the concepts of «justice» and «judicial protection» in the criminal procedure of Ukraine

In the article, the author notes that the introduction of modern approaches to the legal regulation of the judicial control mechanism into the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine of 2012 was one of the right ways to realize the right to a fair trial. It is noted that judicial control, along with other mechanisms of criminal procedure, also ensures the implementation of the rule of law, a qualitatively new approach to understanding the rights and freedoms of a person in criminal proceedings, and a humanistic approach to criminal proceedings. The author also notes that both practitioners and scholars have repeatedly addressed the issues of the concept of judicial control, its features, and correlation with other categories and concepts. And the research by comparing the concept of «judicial control» with the concepts of «justice» and «judicial defense» will make it possible to establish new features of judicial control in criminal proceedings in Ukraine. That is why the author set as the purpose of the study to establish the correlation between the concept of «judicial control» and the concepts of «justice» and «judicial defense» in the criminal procedure of Ukraine. The article analyzes the works of Ukrainian scholars who reveal both the above concepts and their correlation, and also uses the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. The study concludes that judicial protection is an effective mechanism for guaranteeing rights and freedoms in criminal proceedings, and judicial control is a way of judicial protection. In the author’s opinion, it should be borne in mind that such control is exercised not only during the pre-trial investigation, but also during the judicial stages of criminal proceedings. The author concludes that justice and judicial control are separate functions in criminal proceedings. Their differences are related to the stages of criminal proceedings and their purpose and form of implementation. The subjective composition of the realization of justice and judicial control is not always different. Thus, in the case provided for in Part 3 of Article 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, a judge will exercise judicial control over non-appealable rulings of the investigating judge, as well as justice in the same criminal proceedings.

Ensuring the reasonableness of criminal proceedings’ terms

It is indicated that the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine dated April 13, 2012 for the first time at the legislative level established such a principle of criminal proceedings as the reasonableness of terms. Yes, in accordance with Article 28 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine during criminal proceedings, each procedural action or procedural decision must be performed or made within a reasonable time. The article is devoted to the analysis of criminal proceedings’ principle “reasonable terms”. During criminal proceedings, each procedural action or procedural decision must be performed or adopted within a reasonable terms. Terms that are objectively necessary for the execution of procedural actions and the adoption of procedural decisions are considered reasonable. Reasonable terms cannot exceed the terms of execution of individual procedural actions or adoption of individual procedural decisions provided for by the CPC of Ukraine. The pre-trial investigation is carried out within a reasonable terms by the prosecutor, the investigating judge (with regard to the time frame for consideration of issues falling within his competence), and the court conducts the court proceedings. The criteria for determining the reasonableness of criminal proceedings terms are: 1) the complexity of criminal proceedings, which is determined taking into account the number of suspects, accused persons and criminal offenses in respect of which the proceedings are being carried out, the volume and specifics of procedural actions necessary for conducting a pre-trial investigation, etc.; 2) behavior of participants in criminal proceedings; 3) the manner in which investigators, prosecutors, and courts exercise their powers. Criminal proceedings against a person in custody, a minor or a criminal offense committed against a minor must be carried out immediately and considered in court as a matter of priority. It is important to ensure the reasonableness of criminal proceedings terms to study this principle not only in science, but also in judicial practice, in particular, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Adhering to the reasonableness of the terms of criminal proceedings will contribute to the exercise of a person’s right to judicial protection, will ensure an effective and prompt investigation and trial, and thus will ensure the fulfillment of criminal proceedings’ tasks.

The relationship of advocate investigation and evidence in criminal proceedings

The article examines the institution of a lawyer’s investigation in criminal proceedings, as well as the activity of a defense attorney in collecting evidence within the framework of criminal proceedings, which should be regulated as fully and qualitatively as possible (as far as possible) in order to implement such principles of criminal proceedings as the presumption of innocence, ensuring the suspect’s right for the defense, competition of the parties, and these principles should apply not only at the stage of the trial, but also at the stage of the pre-trial investigation. Attention is drawn to the fact that currently, in practice, in the absence of legislative regulation of the procedure for the inclusion of information collected by the defense counsel in the materials of criminal proceedings, the defense counsel has to make a reasoned request to officials who are conducting criminal proceedings. It is noted that evidentiary information collected by the defense attorney on his own without involving the materials of the criminal proceedings cannot be used in the process of proving and substantiating the position of the defense in the criminal proceedings, i.e. become evidence in the full sense of the word. In this regard, it is proposed to make changes to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding the procedure for the inclusion of information collected by the defense attorney in the materials of criminal proceedings, including the procedure for providing it by the defense attorney and the procedure for receiving it from the defense attorney by the inquirer, investigator, prosecutor, and court, specifying that no the right, and the duty of persons conducting pre-trial investigation in criminal proceedings to attach evidentiary information to the materials of criminal proceedings. It is pointed out the need for regulatory regulation of the specified legal relations in view of the importance of the development of the institution of evidence collection by the subjects of criminal proceedings, including the defense attorney; since his activity in this field is necessary for the practical implementation of the principle of adversarial criminal proceedings, equality of the parties, as well as for objective pre-trial investigation and trial of each specific criminal proceeding.

Problematic aspects of attorney’s participation in pre-trial investigation under martial law

According to Article 59 of the Constitution of Ukraine, everyone has the right to legal aid. In cases provided for by law, this assistance is provided free of charge. Everyone is free to choose a defender of their rights. The Bar operates in Ukraine to ensure the right to defense against accusations and to provide legal assistance in resolving cases in courts and other state bodies. These provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine are duplicated in Article 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. According to this provision, a suspect, accused, acquitted, or convicted person has the right to defense, which consists in providing him or her with the opportunity to provide oral or written explanations regarding the suspicion or accusation, the right to collect and submit evidence, to participate personally in criminal proceedings, to use legal assistance of a defense counsel, and to exercise other procedural rights provided for by the CPC of Ukraine. Thus, the direct duty of law enforcement agencies is to protect the legitimate rights and freedoms of a person regardless of his or her gender, nationality, language, citizenship, age, social origin, political beliefs, etc. At the same time, the protection of the rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of a suspect, accused, defendant, acquitted person, a person in respect of whom compulsory medical or educational measures are to be applied or the issue of their application in criminal proceedings is being decided, a person in respect of whom extradition to a foreign state is being considered, as well as a person being brought to administrative responsibility during the consideration of an administrative offense case is carried out by an advocate. This is, in particular, stated in the Law of Ukraine «On the Bar and Practice of Law» № 5076-VI of July 05, 2012. Taking into account the above provisions, it is important to identify and analyze the problematic aspects of the participation of an attorney-at-law in pre-trial investigation in accordance with the current legislation of Ukraine in the context of the introduction of martial law in Ukraine (Decree of the President of Ukraine «On the Introduction of Martial Law in Ukraine» approved by the Law of Ukraine of February 24, 2022 № 2102-IX).

Ensuring that the prosecutor implements the principle of legality during the notification of suspicion

The article establishes that in criminal proceedings granting a person the procedural status of a suspect in committing a criminal offense is an important decision that requires the validity of the suspicion and control over the legality of its adoption. The problematic issues of ensuring the implementation of the principle of legality by the prosecutor during the notification of suspicion have been studied. It has been established that the prosecutor’s provision of legality during the notification of suspicion consists in: strict observance of the procedure established by law; ensuring the legal subject conducting the criminal process and reporting the suspicion; in getting to know the rights of the participants in the proceedings and ensuring their realization of these rights; as well as compliance with legal requirements regarding procedural terms. It was established that criminal prosecution before the decision to notify a person of suspicion is a direct violation of the implementation of the principle of legality, since the person has not acquired the criminal procedural status of a participant, which he actually is at the time of the proceedings, not in form, but in essence, according to the criminal procedural law. It was noted that a person who has not acquired the legal status of a participant in criminal proceedings cannot exercise his «legal» rights, in particular the fundamental right to defense. Attention is drawn to the fact that a general violation of the principle of the legality of criminal proceedings, with the acquisition of relevant grounds and notification to the person of suspicion, the criminal process must comply with another procedure established by law, which is manifested in a clear outline of the legal position of the defense party in criminal proceedings, counting of established procedural terms, etc. It was concluded that the prosecutor, who is the procedural head in a specific criminal proceeding, can supervise the observance of laws during the notification of suspicion, in the form of: a preliminary prosecutor’s counter, by approving the notification of suspicion, revision of previous procedural decisions of the investigator, inquirer, checking at the same time, the validity of the notification of suspicion; personal making of legal decisions at the pre-trial investigation, in particular in the form of notification of suspicion personally by the prosecutor. It was proposed and argued that it would be appropriate to set the time limit for preparation for the defense after notification of suspicion at least 14 days before the completion of the pre-trial investigation in one of the forms provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Issues of legality of procedural actions and adoption of procedural decisions in suspended criminal proceedings

The purpose of this article is to analyze the current provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in the part that regulates the grounds for stopping criminal proceedings, appealing the decision on such a stopping, as well as researching the grounds and criteria for taking procedural actions in stopped criminal proceedings. This research was carried out on the basis of the study and analysis of the works of Ukrainian scientists, materials of law enforcement activities, in particular, court decisions regarding the specified issue, as well as direct (empirical) experience in the field of criminal proceedings. In particular, general scientific (analysis, synthesis, comparison), special-legal (comparative-legal, formal-legal, concrete-legal) systemic and functional methods were used as a methodology of scientific knowledge. During the study was investigated the issue of stopping and resuming the pre-trial investigation. The concepts of "procedural actions" and "procedural decisions" were analyzed, the current criminal procedural norms regulating the order of stopping the pre-trial investigation were evaluated, legislative gaps were identified that jeopardize the effectiveness of the criminal process and proposed ways of improving the content and construction of such norms. As a result of the research, a detailed analysis of the provisions of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine regarding the suspension of pre-trial investigation was carried out. Practical problematic aspects were identified, recommendations were presented and practical mechanisms for making changes to the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine were proposed.

Implementation of the Rules of the Institute of Application of Ciminal Law Measures to Legal Entities in Court Practice: Results of a 10-Year Marathon

The article analyzes both criminal and criminal procedural legislation and court practice with regard to the application of criminal law measures against legal entities. The author establishes that at the regulatory level, the objective reason for the low efficiency of the rules on the application of such measures is, first of all, the dependence established by the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine between the procedural fate of proceedings against a legal entity and criminal proceedings against an authorized person who committed a relevant criminal offense on behalf of and/or in the interests of a legal entity. The author analyzed 6 verdicts which resolved the issue of application of criminal legal measures against legal entities. As can be seen from the above analysis, during the 10 years of the legal institution on the application of criminal legal measures against legal entities, the court practice is characterized by a progressive movement from primitive decisions on the application of criminal legal measures against legal entities in the wrong procedural order provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine to verdicts that applied such measures procedurally correctly. In our opinion, the reason for such a small number of cases of application of criminal legal measures against legal entities in Ukraine is the fact that the procedural fate of proceedings against a legal entity is completely dependent on the criminal proceedings against its authorized person, and the lack of a single structural part of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine that would regulate the procedural procedure for application of criminal legal measures against legal entities. This situation should be remedied at the regulatory level by introducing appropriate amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. At the same time, there is a need to develop training activities for stakeholders – investigators, prosecutors, judges, lawyers - aimed at learning the procedure for applying criminal legal measures to legal entities. Key words: criminal law measures against legal entities, proceedings against a legal entity, criminal proceedings against an individual, authorized person of a legal entity, actions on behalf of and/or in the interests of a legal entity, representative of a legal entity in respect of which proceedings are being conducted, criminal offense, training of investigators, prosecutors, attorneys, judges.

Improving the criminal and legal action against domestic violence in Ukraine in the conditions of martial law

The paper examines the experience of criminal legal response to domestic violence in Ukraine under martial law. For this purpose, the norms of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, and the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention and Combating Domestic Violence" were analyzed, which relate to combating domestic violence. The current state and statistical data related to the perpetration of domestic violence in Ukraine since the beginning of martial law are analyzed. The impact of the war on the nature and level of crime related to domestic violence is analyzed. It was established that the level of crime related to domestic violence is increasing under martial law. It was researched that the perpetrators are most often men. Such a trend is observed in the world in general and was observed in Ukraine before the beginning of martial law. It has been established that psychological trauma caused by war, in particular post-traumatic syndrome, in both perpetrators and victims has a significant impact on the increase in the level of crime related to domestic violence. In view of this, it was investigated that an important aspect in combating domestic violence is also psychological work with offenders and victims. The main areas of improvement of the criminal-legal response to domestic violence in Ukraine under the conditions of martial law have been determined. According to the results of the conducted research, it is proposed to: supplement Article 1261 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine with a qualified composition of the crime, and the qualifying features to determine the commission of a crime with particular cruelty or with the use of weapons; to supplement part 1 of Article 911 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine with such a restrictive measure as temporary withdrawal of documents certifying the right to own and carry weapons with temporary withdrawal of weapons, to establish a similar norm in part 6 of Article 194 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in part 2 of Article 25 , Part 2 of Article 26 of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention and Combating Domestic Violence".

Огляд місця події: особливості залучення спеціаліста

The features of involving a specialist during the examination of the scene have been considered. It is noted that one of the main functions of the state is to counter crime, which is the basis of its criminal justice policy in all its manifestations, directions, and forms. The criminal justice aspect of countering crime primarily involves the activities of law enforcement agencies in detecting and investigating criminal offenses, establishing the guilty parties in their commission, and holding them accountable. Therefore, in every case of committing criminal offenses, law enforcement agencies must ensure prompt, thorough, and comprehensive investigation. Compliance with all principles of criminal proceedings is particularly important during investigative (search) actions. It is noted that today scientific and technological progress has significantly advanced, so in order for pre-trial investigation to be conducted effectively and for the tasks of criminal proceedings to be fulfilled, it is necessary to use the most modern achievements in various fields of science and technology. Experts and specialists have always been the leaders in these achievements in criminal proceedings. The concept of a specialist according to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and other regulatory legal acts has been analyzed, and it has been concluded that special regulatory legal acts provide a broader understanding of the concept of a specialist than the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The requirements placed on a specialist during the examination of the scene and the peculiarities of conducting it with the involvement of a specialist have been disclosed. After analyzing Part 3 of Article 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, we have concluded that the participation of a specialist during the examination of the scene is not mandatory. It is up to the investigator or prosecutor to decide whether to invite a specialist for the conduct of this investigative (search) action. The examination of the scene is the most informative investigative (search) action regarding the committed criminal offense. Without the involvement of a specialist, the investigator or prosecutor conducting the examination of the scene may overlook and fail to identify evidence that could be of significant importance to the evidentiary base. In our opinion, it is advisable to utilize specialized knowledge during every examination of the scene, therefore the participation of a specialist should be mandatory. The participation of a specialist in each case during the conduct of this investigative (search) action will contribute to improving the quality of the pre-trial investigation. Therefore, we propose to amend Part 3 of Article 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine as follows: Part 3: The victim, suspect, defense counsel, legal representative, and other participants in the criminal proceedings may be invited to participate in the examination. In order to obtain assistance on matters requiring specialized knowledge, the investigator and prosecutor must invite specialists to participate in the examination.

Features of pre-trial investigation of smuggling of narcotic substances, psychotropic substances, their analogues or precursors, or counterfeit medicinal products

The article explores the peculiarities of pre-trial investigation of smuggling of narcotic substances, psychotropic substances, their analogues or precursors, or counterfeit medicinal products,. It emphasizes that the illegal circulation of narcotic substances at regional, national, and international levels is reaching alarming proportions that are constantly growing. As a result, there has been an increase in the number of criminal proceedings investigated within this category of criminal offenses. This has posed new challenges for researchers and practitioners, who are involved in improving existing and developing new research methods. It is noted that pre-trial investigation is one of the most important stages of criminal proceedings, preceding the court hearing and commencing from the moment information about the criminal offense is entered into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations (hereinafter referred to as the URPI). The initiation of pre-trial investigation within their competence is the responsibility of the investigator or prosecutor. One of the peculiarities of detecting the smuggling of narcotic substances is that information about the commission of this crime is obtained in most cases through independent detection by the investigator, prosecutor, or other authorized official from any source of circumstances that may indicate its commission. It has been established that in most cases, the detection of the smuggling of narcotic substances fully relies on the law enforcement officers during the performance of their professional duties, usually on the officials of the revenue and customs authorities during the implementation of customs control. In the event of direct detection of signs of a crime provided for in Article 305 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, a report is drawn up by a law enforcement officer, or if by another person, a statement is written, specifying the data that constitute the content of the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations. The investigator and prosecutor are obliged to enter the relevant information into the URPI and initiate an investigation urgently, but No. later than 24 hours after the detection of circumstances from any source that may indicate the commission of smuggling of narcotic substances. It is stated that in urgent cases, the examination of the scene of the crime can be conducted before entering the information into the URPI. The detection of smuggling of narcotic substances should be considered an urgent case, therefore the examination of the scene of the crime can be conducted before entering the information into the URPI, and the information must be entered immediately after the completion of the examination. A protocol is drawn up on the conduct of the examination of the scene of the crime in accordance with the requirements of Article 104 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. The importance of conducting a search of a person after the examination of the scene of the crime is emphasized. In addition to the examination of the scene of the crime and the search of a person, the following investigative (search) actions are considered priority in the investigation of smuggling of narcotic substances: examination of material evidence, appointment of expertise, interrogation, seizure of property. The peculiarities of conducting the aforementioned investigative (search) actions in the investigation of smuggling of narcotic substances are disclosed. An algorithm of actions during the investigation of this type of crime is proposed.

OBTAINING TESTIMONY OF A WITNESS IN CONDITIONS THAT ENSURE HIS SAFETY IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

The scientific article is devoted to the study of procedural, organizational-tactical and psychological features of obtaining witness statements in conditions that ensure his safety in criminal proceedings. It was concluded that the tactics of obtaining statements during the interrogation of a witness at the stage of pre-trial investigation are formed depending on the typical interrogation program of a person who is in the status of a witness (eyewitness, witness, expert, whistleblower, confidant, etc.), his age, and depends on the investigator situations in specific criminal proceedings, from real and potential threats to such persons, their relatives and relatives. It is noted that in the case when there are sufficient grounds to believe that the life, housing, health, property of the witness, his family and relatives are in danger, his interrogation should be conducted in conditions that ensure the confidentiality of personal information. It is emphasized that when deciding on the question of conducting an interrogation of a witness, it is worth giving priority to the safety of the witness, his family and friends, without risking the loss of potential evidence. Arguments are given that, for tactical reasons, it is expedient to question a witness in a court session by an investigating judge during a pre-trial investigation, or in the mode of a video conference using technical means from another room, in particular outside the court premises, to ensure the confidentiality of personal information. It was emphasized that obtaining objective information from minors and ensuring their safety at the same time depends on the skillful organization by the investigators of the procedure of questioning such a witness with the participation of a legal representative and a psychologist, as well as taking measures to ensure the confidentiality of information about the minor. In cases where a witness declares illegal influence after testifying, in order to keep information about his identity confidential, it is advisable to conduct the interrogation again with the assignment of the pseudonym of the participant in the investigative (search) action to the witness. In order to expand the procedural capabilities of the witness and his representative, in particular with regard to ensuring the safety of the witness due to the existence of a danger to life and health, the position is advocated for granting the right to the witness and his legal representative to apply to the investigating judge with a request to interrogate such a person in a court session in order Art. 225 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, in particular the simultaneous interrogation of two or more already interrogated persons.

FORENSIC EXAMINATIONS DURING THE INVESTIGATION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES IN THE FIELD OF LAND USE, SUBSOIL PROTECTION, AND ATMOSPHERIC AIR

The study is devoted to typical forensic examinations during the investigation of criminal offenses in the field of land use, subsoil protection, atmospheric air. Taking into account the provisions of the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, it is possible to distinguish three procedural forms of the use of special knowledge that can be used in the investigation of criminal offenses against the environment: independent use of special knowledge by the investigator; participation in criminal proceedings of a specialist; examination. It is noted that forensic examination is the most effective means of performing investigative tasks in proceedings on criminal offenses in the field of land use, subsoil protection, atmospheric air, provided strict compliance with the requirements of criminal procedural legislation, regarding the appointment and conduct of this investigative (search) action. It is emphasized that expertise in the mentioned proceedings should be appointed only in the case when there is a real need for it, when without an expert’s answer to certain questions it is impossible to establish the circumstances of a criminal offense. The analysis of the researchers’ theoretical work and the study of investigative and judicial practice materials made it possible to identify the following main types of expertise that are carried out during investigations in the field of land use, subsoil protection, atmospheric air: ecological, forensic chemical, forensic expertise on land management, soil science, construction and technical technical, technological, toxicological, construction-technical, agro-technical, forestry, forensic-medical, medical-sanitary, forensic-veterinary. It was also concluded that during the investigation of the specified illegal acts, other types of forensic examinations may be appointed, including, in particular, engineering and technical, biological, dactyloscopic, handwriting, technical and forensic examination of documents, evaluation and land, forensic and material science examination of oil products, lubricants, fuel and lubricant materials, examination of computer equipment and software products, etc. Arguments are given that depending on the needs of the investigation, the specified types of forensic examinations can be assigned both at the initial and at the next stage of the investigation.

PROBLEMATIC ASPECTS IN THE INVESTIGATION OF WAR CRIMES

This article examines the problematic aspects that arise during the investigation of war crimes, focusing on identifying the main challenges and developing recommendations to overcome them. It analyzes the difficulties faced by investigative bodies in collecting evidence, the legal and procedural barriers that complicate the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators. Special attention is given to the role of international law and the cooperation of interstate organizations in improving the effectiveness of investigations. As a result of the research, specific recommendations are proposed to enhance the quality of war crime investigations and strengthen the rule of law at the international level. The research on this topic analyzes the works of scholars such as I. Hlovyuk, V. Zavtur, N. Lashchuk, V. Navrotskaya, M. Pashkovsky, R. Serkevich, N. Ustritskaya, and others. Greater attention is paid to current legislative acts and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The issue of exchanging prisoners of war in Ukraine is regulated by various normative legal acts, including the ICC RS and the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CPCU). The appendix to Article 3 of the CPCU establishes that a person who has the procedural status of a suspect, accused, or convicted can be exchanged as a prisoner of war. Amendments to the CPCU regarding the interrogation of persons for whom a decision on exchange has been made do not contain substantive additions or clarifications, which may lead to inappropriate application of these provisions. Although the CPCU does not contain a separate norm regarding the procedural status of prisoners of war, the legislator has made changes to regulate the exchange of persons during martial law, which became possible thanks to the law dated July 28, 2022. Despite the legislator’s attempts to improve the procedure for exchanging prisoners of war, some aspects remain complex, which may violate the principle of legality and the rule of law. Ukraine, even without being a state party to the ICC RS, is obliged to cooperate with this international body in accordance with Article 12(3) of this statute. The presence of implementing legislation that regulates national cooperation procedures is a prerequisite for the comprehensive fulfilment of Ukraine’s obligations to the ICC. Better definition of the statuses of participants in criminal proceedings, particularly those for whom the ICC’s request for co-operation has been received, as well as the regulatory establishment of the status of prisoners of war, is needed. Ukrainian prosecutors and pre-trial investigation bodies should adhere to the specifics provided by the ICC Rules of Evidence when conducting interrogations of witnesses, suspects, and victims. Failure to take appropriate actions during interrogations may lead to the recognition of interrogation protocols as inadmissible evidence, which will reduce the number of high-quality evidence on the part of the prosecution.

From a Piece of Paper to Court Evidence: The Means Of Collection and Examination of Physical Documents in Ukrainian Criminal Justice

The purpose of this article is to outline criminal procedural and forensic means of collection and examination of physical documents in Ukrainian criminal justice. The linguistic analysis, formal-legal, formal-logical, modeling, forecasting methods, as well as the praxeological approach in forensic science are used. The authors argue that a document, as a material object, must be obtained in a manner permitted by law and examined using the necessary forensic means in order to acquire evidentiary status and be suitable for use in criminal proceedings. It was established that the procedural status of a document depends on its internal and external features. If the content of the document carries evidentiary information, it is considered written evidence; if such information is carried by its external (material) features, it is physical (real) evidence. Procedural means of collecting documents are defined by Art. 93 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and differ for the parties to the proceedings. Preliminary, judicial and expert examination of documents is distinguished. The main stages of the preliminary examination of documents and the necessary technical means are described. It is emphasized that Ukrainian judges avoid using their own special knowledge when examining documents. Some features of the appointment of forensic examinations of documents and evaluation of their conclusions are highlighted. The perspective of the study of methods of using documents as evidence has been established.

Problems of closing criminal proceedings due to the expiration of pre-trial investigation deadlines

The article is dedicated to addressing the current issues in the theory and practice of closing criminal proceedings during the pre-trial investigation stage, particularly focusing on the basis of closing due to the expiration of pre-trial investigation deadlines. The problem of closing criminal proceedings by the investigating judge based on paragraph 10 of Part 1 of Article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine is currently the subject of active discussions among legal professionals. This basis is directly related to the pre-trial investigation stage and, according to the current established practice of the Supreme Court, is classified as exclusive competence of the prosecutor, limiting the Investigating Judge's ability to exercise effective judicial control during the pre-trial investigation stage. It is noted that the absence of these powers in the Investigating Judge entails the risk of violating the reasonable time requirements for pre-trial investigation, as the pre-trial investigation deadline is not just a formality. Enshrining in procedural law the prosecutor's obligation to apply to the court with an accusatory document or close the criminal proceedings as soon as possible but not later than the procedural deadline after notifying the suspect of the accusation is a guarantee of the fundamental right of individuals to have their cases heard within a reasonable time frame. Unfortunately, in practical terms, this guarantee is not always implemented, and the lack of effective judicial control only contributes to the spread of prosecutorial inactivity. The article suggests that the most optimal solution to this problem is the alternative competence of both the prosecutor and the Investigating Judge regarding the authority to close criminal proceedings during the pre-trial investigation stage. This would help achieve a balance of interests between the parties involved in criminal proceedings and prevent abuses of power. To improve the mechanism for ensuring compliance with reasonable deadlines, the author proposes expanding and specifying the powers of the Investigating Judge when closing criminal proceedings. Specifically, it is suggested to add Part 2-1 to Article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine: «Criminal proceedings at the pre-trial investigation stage are closed by the Investigating Judge based on the grounds provided for in paragraph 10 of this article if the suspect does not object to the closure on these grounds.»

Circumstances to be established during investigation of the involvement of minors in the illegal production, manufacture, purchase, storage, transportation, shipment or sale of narcotics, psychotropic substances or their analogues

The scientific article discloses the circumstances to be established during the investigation of the involvement of minors in the illegal production, manufacture, acquisition, storage, transportation, forwarding or sale of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues. As a result of a detailed analysis of the scientific literature on criminology and the criminal process, it was established that at the current stage of development, this issue remains insufficiently researched. The positions of scientists regarding the importance of the circumstances to be established in certain methods of investigation of criminal offenses are considered. It is established that in criminal offenses committed by minors, in addition to the circumstances provided for in Art. 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, it is also necessary to find out: 1) complete and comprehensive information about the person of the minor: his age (date, month, year of birth), state of health and level of development, other social and psychological features of the person, which must be taken into account when individualizing responsibility or selected educational events. If there is evidence of a minor's mental retardation not related to mental illness, it should also be determined whether he could fully understand the meaning of his actions and to what extent he could control them; 2) the minor's attitude towards the act committed by him; 3) living conditions and upbringing of a minor; 4) the presence of adult instigators and other accomplices of the criminal offense. In the course of the study, it was found that every circumstance that must be established at the beginning of the pre-trial investigation of this category of crimes in accordance with Art. 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine should be considered in relation to the circumstances provided for in Art. 485 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (taking into account the age and socio-psychological characteristics of minors) in order to achieve the objectives of criminal proceedings, in particular when establishing: a) the circumstances of the fact (event) involving a minor in the illegal production, manufacture, acquisition, storage, transportation, forwarding or sale of narcotics means, psychotropic substances or their analogues; the circumstances of the minor's culpability (it is necessary to establish the exact age in order to be able to prosecute); b) circumstances characterizing the person of a minor (their living conditions, upbringing, state of health, level of development).

Current issues of properties of evidence in criminal proceedings

Current issues of properties of evidence in criminal proceedings